"Is it really a Cockatoo?"

[David]

Originally Posted by Ian

Frustratingly, we are left with a bunch of inductive ideas and very few ways of testing the hypotheses generated. We have one explanation for the shape of the pommel that another author has labeled a "consensus view." It seems to me that it is necessary to topple that idea before a new one can take its place. Which is to say that the "cockatoo hilt" idea stands until, through a deductive process, it can be shown to be wrong. [Obviously all ideas can be discussed and debated, but in the end there is only one that survives the test of truth.]

I'm afraid i completely disagree here. IF Cato's theory actually had been clearly sourced and references for his kakatau theory had been disclosed in his writings i might well agree. But simply because his idea is the only one published or that occasionally someone has mentioned that the kakatau theory is a "consensus view" (Consensus of whom exactly? When? Where? Why?) is not enough in my mind to validate it as the superior theory. It does not seem that the kakatau theory has been any more "tested" than the sarimanok one. I see no reason why both these theories should not be given equal standing as theories since neither can be seen as anything more than an inductive idea at this point. There is no substantial fact to be toppled here.

[kai]

I'm afraid I completely agree with David here.

We should compile data for both hypotheses (as well as looking out for additional claims) and compare their respective standing in due time.

Regards,
Kai

[David]

Originally Posted by kai

I'm afraid I completely agree with David here.

We should compile data for both hypotheses (as well as looking out for additional claims) and compare their respective standing in due time.

Regards,
Kai

Hey Kai, maybe neither of us should be afraid. Peaceful co-existence of theories is not something that we need fear. LOL!