Racial Evolution 101

Ted is comical when he discusses physics, but here he sinks to a sleazy dishonesty on which I have noted in other forums. Last time I told him this he blew it off without any attempt to engage the demonstration of his cynical and crass distortions.Redwolf is, of course, Ted Holden himself. Noone else could possibly have this degree of stupidity. He is still quoting his standard extract from Evolution and Ethics, which Sir Arthur Keith wrote in about 1946. It is now on-line; I give the link.I am here recycling the refutation I wrote some years ago, which is available through the Google archive.It is a weird irony to see this mongraph quoted by someone like Ted, who apparently has no interest or concern with basic ethics or morals or integrity.From the conclusion of the chapter Ted quoted: It is the standard problem, which Keith also faced. He attempted to apply evolution to explain aspects of human behaviour. We might debate the success or otherwise of his endeavour; but the point is that the behaviour exists in any case, even long before evolution was conceived. The behaviour is not a result of accepting evolutionary explanations; and that is not Keith's position.Ted does suggest this, of course. But Ted is an idiot.Read Keith for himself if you are interested in Ted's repugnant quote mines, which attempt to smear a man of integrity and high standards of a kind Ted could only dream about.Sylas

Rocket is splitting hairs for no good reason.Full formal citations are not required here; we aren't writing formal technical papers.If you are repeating information in your own words, such as dimensions of a warship or distances to a galaxy or whatever, then references are not mandatory, but can reasonably be requested if someone asks to see claims defended. If someone is working from memory or their own background knowledge, and can't find a reference at short notice, then no problem. Just say so.If someone takes a copy of the exact text explaining some information, then it must be clearly distinguished from your own original text, and some kind of attribution given.Full formal citation is not required, but at the least it must be clear what text is yours, and what text is not. Failing to make this clear is plagiarism, and it makes no difference whether or not the text is in the public domain, or from the government, or anything else. It is part of the forum guidelines that plagiarism is not permitted.redwolf is an interesting case. He has been repeating stuff from websites; but I am pretty damn sure he is the author of the website anyway. He should say so. I've cited my own writing before this; it is good practice to be clear if you are repeating stuff you already have available at other locations.