On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Haim <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Lou Talman Posted: Oct 14, 2012 11:41 AM
Gosh, Lou, I had to ponder this for a while (about 3/10 of a nanosecond), but I don't think your answer works for me, at all. If Boaler is not correct, this must allow for the possibility that Milgram and Bishop criticized her WORK in a manner that is fair and reasonable by generally accepted scholarly standards. Why would they have to "answer" for that?
>> GS Chandy Posted: Oct 13, 2012 10:20 AM
>>>If Dr Boaler is correct in her account, then both
>>>Professor Milgram and Professor Bishop have much to
>> And what if she is not correct?
>That's an easy one: Then all three of them have much to
Rather, if Boaler is not correct, then she is twice damned: once for shoddy scholarly work, and once for defamation.
No representation without taxation.
I think you know very well of what I spoke, Haim
Disingenuousness doesn't become you. It's a trick you've tried before, and it discredited you then, too.