7 Responses

  1. Tria MacLeod
    Tria MacLeod February 19, 2013 at 9:11 pm |

    Interesting that the term civility was brought up as that is a huge, contentious point across a decent section of the internet atm. I have no doubt that a group of researchers, such as yourselves, will have no problem treating each other with respect and dignity while keeping the discussion solely to the evidence and methods used to obtain said evidence.

    Regarding the comment that people ‘read’ you not taking up the banner for Ketchum’s paper as being a personal slight against her as a person. I hope they understand that you can disagree vehemently or even be non-interested in someone’s research/evidence/project while feeling no animosity towards the person themselves. It’s like having different tastes in music, not liking their polka-punk mash up, or the detailed blog post regarding the wonders of Mozart meets Jolly Joe, doesn’t mean you don’t like them as person or that you lose any respect for them and their other talents.

  2. Jon Downes
    Jon Downes February 20, 2013 at 8:47 am |

    Tria, I agree entirely. I, too, have not ‘taken up the banner’ for Dr Ketchum’s paper. However, I hope that I have always been polite and respectful to her as a person. When any discussion forum loses the ability to be polite to each other it soon denigrates into a mishmash of name calling and insults, and – in my humble opinion – it is soon after that that the decent people (researchers and non researchers) leave and all you are left with is another internet bear pit. So Tria, and indeed Loren, Bravo!

  3. mandors
    mandors February 20, 2013 at 11:17 am |

    Loren, I think some of the perceived disdain may have arisen from the provenance of the sample Dr. Ketchum used. If I recall, it is a disturbing story from, let us say, a questionable individual.

  4. drjon
    drjon February 20, 2013 at 2:58 pm |

    Personally, i have been astounded at the sheer volume of venom being directed at Dr Ketchum and her study… on both sides. I’m glad for Dr Ketchum’s sake that folk like Loren are prepared to stand up.

  5. Joxman2k
    Joxman2k February 20, 2013 at 3:35 pm |

    Personally I think a good discussion is one where people disagree and argue points ONLY if honesty to the subject matter is maintained. If someone disagrees with your view, you look at the criticism honestly, decide if it has merit then alter your view accordingly. To believe your view is the absolute truth is ignorant at best and arrogant at worst.

    That honesty to the subject matter is paramount to a healthy understanding of it. It’s important to have critical thinking skills.

    Personal attacks are just wasteful and lead to devolution of the discussion. It’s not being honest to the subject. It’s letting ego and politics take over.

    Being polite for the sake of being polite is political and egotistical. It’s a way of manipulating people to like you and ergo your viewpoint. Don’t get me wrong I’m not saying to be a jerkface or argumentative for its own sake. I’m just saying to concentrate all criticisms on the subject matter for the furthering of its understanding.

  6. Troodon56
    Troodon56 February 20, 2013 at 6:37 pm |

    When it comes to cryptozoology, I’m afraid I have to admit that my specialty isn’t Bigfoot or hominology. However, I do know a few things or two about the topic, so I’ll just give my 2 cents here.

    I have to say, I am more than a bit skeptical about some of Dr. Ketchum’s claims, especially the ones about them interbreeding with humans thousands of years ago. However, that is no excuse to insult and ridicule her, or start some kind of smear campaign against her.

    So even though I disagree with some of Ketchum’s ideas and theories, we definitely should still treat her with as much respect and civility as possible.

  7. AreWeThereYeti
    AreWeThereYeti March 4, 2013 at 3:43 pm |

    When you must resort to name-calling it means you’ve lost the argument.

Comments are closed.