Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site psivax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!qantel!hplabs!sdcrdcf!psivax!friesen
From: friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: On Astronomers and Titanium/Mylar Pterosaurs
Message-ID: <729@psivax.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 16-Sep-85 15:53:44 EDT
Article-I.D.: psivax.729
Posted: Mon Sep 16 15:53:44 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 21-Sep-85 05:25:05 EDT
References: <393@imsvax.UUCP>
Reply-To: friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen)
Organization: Pacesetter Systems Inc., Sylmar, CA
Lines: 33


	The above referenced article by Mr Holden includes a number of
quotes from a popular science text which show a considerable
misunderstanding of the nature of popular science texts.  The quotes
are of extreme statements which, if you read the whole book, you will
find that the author *himself* does *not* believe.
	The problem is that such books must cater to popular tastes,
which often(usually) are not oriented toward "dry" technical
discussions.  Thus the when trying to get across a rather ordinary set
of facts, the author must find a way of *dramatizing* the presentation
to keep his audience interested. One way of doing this is to make
outlandish statements and then discuss them back to the truth. Such
statements are rather like banner headlines in newspapers, they
introduce a subject, but do not *really* say anything. The way to read
such a thing is to ask "what is the bottom line?" or "where does the
author *end* *up*?".
	As a matter of fact Dr Desmond in "Hot-blooded Dinosaurs"
comes on rather strong with this technique. Here he is trying to
overcome a second area of reader resistance, the rather unrealistic,
but deeply ingrained, preconceptions most people have about dinosaurs.
When fced with changing their prconception many people will rather
simply ignore the source of the conflict. Dr. Desmond was apparently
trying to *really* pep his book up, so that it would hold even such an
audience. The result is a "science" book that in some ways reads like
the National Enquirer. Not entirely, thank goodness, or the book would
be totally without value. At least his final conclusions are essentially
correct, even if he gets there by rather sensationalist methods.
-- 

				Sarima (Stanley Friesen)

UUCP: {ttidca|ihnp4|sdcrdcf|quad1|nrcvax|bellcore|logico}!psivax!friesen
ARPA: ttidca!psivax!friesen@rand-unix.arpa


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com