Xref: utzoo news.groups:10214 news.misc:3222 sci.misc:3630 talk.religion.newage:3459 talk.philosophy.misc:2503
Path: utzoo!attcan!ncrcan!dptcdc!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!ukma!uflorida!indri!aplcen!stdc.jhuapl.edu!jwm
From: jwm@stdc.jhuapl.edu (Jim Meritt)
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.misc,sci.misc,talk.religion.newage,talk.philosophy.misc
Subject: Re: *** CALL FOR DISCUSSION *** Creation of newsgroup sci.skeptic
Keywords: new age new science parapsychology skepticism
Message-ID: <1606@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu>
Date: 19 Jun 89 12:36:26 GMT
References: <2357@yunexus.UUCP> <1582@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu> <1521@cbnewsh.ATT.COM>
Sender: news@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu
Reply-To: jwm@aplvax.UUCP (Jim Meritt)
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: JHU-Applied Physics Laboratory
Lines: 24

In article <1521@cbnewsh.ATT.COM> wcs@cbnewsh.ATT.COM (Bill Stewart 201-949-0705 ho95c.att.com!wcs) writes:
}In article <whichever> Norman Gall writes:
}]>wondered if a skeptical group might not be called for.
}]>The idea would be that the group would be unmoderated and that issues
}]>of New Ageism and its ilk might be discussed openly and skeptically.
}]>No bashing allowed!
}
}Sorry, but a group on skepticism inherently implies bashing,
}including SKEPTIC-BASHING.


It may to you, and those who approach it as you may, but it does not
necessarily follow.  It is easy to be thoughtful (first entry in my
dictionary for definition of skeptic) on a phenomena without personal
attacks.    The only time "bashing" inherently follows is when one
is so attached to their viewpoints that they are incapable of separating
their views from their selves, and are incapable of supporting the views.

So have the sci.skeptic, but keep the newagers out of it.  


........................................................................
The above was test data, and not the responsibility of any organization.
jwm@aplvax.jhuapl.edu  - or - jwm@aplvax.uucp  - or - meritt%aplvm.BITNET