We know Nicholas Wade is a terrible journalist who doesn't get anything right, uses sloppy diction, and can't wrap his head around complex topics. Some people, on the other hand, have not realized how bad Wade truly is (e.g., his editors at the New York Times who have yet to fire the guy). But that's changing, as can be seen when Wade steps foot in (dare I say, "wades") into someone's domain of expertise). Take, for example, Wade on Anthropology. That article elicited the following response from Anthropologist James Holland Jones:
Nicholas Wade, who normally writes really terrific stuff on science in the New York Times, has a brief piece on our Anthropology fracas du jour.
Too much respect for Wade's work, so you know this isn't a biased Wade-hater.
It’s good to see an expression of concern for the place of science in anthropology in such a prominent place and by such an important science writer. I just wish he had gotten a few more things right.
Don't we all Dr. Jones. Don't we all.
P.S. An anthropologist named Dr. Jones? Nice.
No comments:
Post a Comment