APG-L Archives

Archiver > APG > 1999-12 > 0944500231


From: <>
Subject: Re: [APG] More comments
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 12:10:31 EST


In a message dated 12/6/99 10:29:44 AM Eastern Standard Time,
writes:

<< I can't see
Stanford claming that their scientific research is any better than UC
Berkeley - we can only say they are both very good and we should try to
emulate their research procedures. Am I making any sense here?
Everett B. ireland >>

Everrett

Normally, I would agree wholeheartedly, but we're not talking about
mature science where they basically teach and use the same principles and
logic to come up with their deductions. We're talking about taking a folk
art and growing it into a science.

The difference that I see is that the scientists at Stanford and Berkeley
have those peer review periods you talk about, but these periods do not
include consumer consumption of the product. In fact, publication is one of
the steps to getting a product approved for consumers. Our "product" is
different in that once it is published, it is consumable.

Now, if we could get more colleges to start offering BS programs with a
major in genealogy, maybe we would mature as a science.... ;)

-- Jan DeLucien
Genealogical Enterprises, LLC

This thread: