Revolutionary sarcasm

From Greg Williams (930118)

Avery.Andrews 930118.0930

And, I'd add, `divergent interpretations of similar models'. Except that
anything other than `imbeciles rampant' might make PCT seem less
revolutionary and utterly different from everybody else's ideas. Deja vu:
the Beer debate. It's hard to be conciliatory when one of your basic claims
is that biology has to start completely over.

Well, `the revolution' is what I would advise to keep quiet about, at
least in this document. The revolutionary claims are neither believable
nor probably even comprehensible until one accepts the idea that the
establishment is seriously confused, so first things first.

And *I* don't believe that biology has to start completely over. E.g.
Bizzi et. al.'s demo of the elastic properties of the skeleto-muscular
system seems useful to me, even though I wish they were a lot more
forthcoming about what they thought the explanation was. And you
yourself have been quite laudatory about the beer bug.

You misunderstood me. I was SUPPORTING your efforts at bridge-building, and
being sarcastic about the hard-line revolutionary stance you are NOT
supporting. The old saw goes, "Don't WOUND the King." Until PCT has sufficient
firepower to be lethal to the establishment(s) it wants to revolutionize, pot
shots generally will just increase the polarity and bad feelings between the
uptown folks and the ghetto dwellers... which might (again unfortunately) lead
to some vindictive head-rolling "when the revolution finally comes."

As ever,