[From Rick Marken (940607.1020)]
Jeff Vancouver (940606) --
It is an us against the world attitude.
Tom Bourbon (940606.1631)--
Remember, you are seeing us when we talk among ourselves -- _after_ we have
put on our best faces and tried to communicate with "the world." When we
try to publish work on PCT modeling, we usually go out of our way to avoid
such an "attitude" -- not that it seems to help.
This is an excellent point. I think if you saw how Tom, Bill P. and I have
been treated by reviewers and editors you would see who really has the "us
against the world" attitude. CSG-L is the only place we get to talk about PCT
honestly and candidly, without having to worry about whether what we say
about the model is "palatable" to those who are in power (those who control
access to the journals, grants, tenure).
We are only against cant and arm waving. If there is an alternative to the
view that 1) behavior is control and 2) PCT is the model that explains
that phenomenon then we are happy to consider it. So far, no viable
alternative has been presented. Is that our fault? Was it Copernicus' fault
that a heliocentric model ultimately was simpler and more accurate than the
geocentric one?
Do the people who reject PCT have an "us against the world" attitude too?
Best
Rick