[meteorite-list] re: All Hail Eris and Dysnomia (2003 UB313)

[Marco Langbroek]

Sterling,

In your latest post you write:

 > When I [Sterling] said:
 >
 >>> As to what Ortiz actually did, I do not know the truth of
 >>> things. And neither do you.
 >
 > You responded:
 >
 >>   Yet you act as if you do know. You sentence him to be guilty.
 >
 > This is, as they say, an extreme rendering of the text!
 > How do I "sentence him" by saying I don't know the
 > truth? This is not logical of you.


Sterling, to quote you directly from your first post that started this exchange:

> "Rights" and "credit" are neither right nor credible
> when stolen. 

..while in you post of the 15th you say for example:

> I can conceive of less charitable
> explanations for the same sequence of events. 

This is clear I think. You favour the dark reading of the events and consider 
the discovery to be "stolen". If you didn't, we in fact would not have this 
polemic. I think I am logical in this, really.

As for the rest of your last posting, the part that summarizes in:

> Not astronomy, but cultural anthropology might be the
> key to understanding what's going on here. 

Ah! You finally seem to see some of the light here! Indeed, I fear cultural 
aspects are STRONGLY involved in this whole situation, and not just and 
primarily in the way Ortiz et al. handle their defence. This is actually the 
feeling of many non-Americans regarding this whole controversy.

I would have A LOT to say on this. Earlier I didn't want to do that as I could 
see it ignite a hughe flame on this list about politics and culture, America 
versus te rest of the World, with a lot of patriotic sentiments. That is what is 
(still) refraining me but now you bring up this subject of culture yourself, I 
am very, very tempted to give you my European view on this...

There is one thing I would like to ad about Ortiz et al. retracting their 
website account. And that is, please acknowledge that Ortiz et al. are 
non-native speakers of English. In a debate with native speakers, that always 
brings you into a very  uncomfortable disadvantage.

In a situation like we have at hand here, where as I wrote every word and every 
letter written is scrutinized, lifted up out of their context and the exact 
meaning and implication discussed, this gives you one reason why Ortiz et al. 
feel they should be conservative in what they make public regarding written 
defense. When sentiments rage this high and accusations already have been issued 
that are not born out by facts but rather by writing in suggestions of dark 
intentions into things, it is very easy for a native speaker to play the 
linguistic card and use your own words againts you even if they were not 
intended to imply the way they are turned against you. It is also very 
understandable that the non-native speaker who is in the defense against 
accusations in the debate then feels uncertain and starts to be very cautious 
about what he says.

In fact, as a side note, in this very current polemic between me (a non-native 
speaker of English) and you (a native speaker of English) you have started to 
play this linguistic card too when you subtly correct my English when you quote 
me, as I noted in one of your previous posts.

- Marco

-----
Dr Marco Langbroek
Dutch Meteor Society (DMS)

e-mail: meteorites at dmsweb.org
private website http://home.wanadoo.nl/marco.langbroek
DMS website http://www.dmsweb.org
-----