From: utzoo!decvax!harpo!eagle!mhtsa!alice!rabbit!lucius
Newsgroups: net.movies
Title: Re: Engineers (sheer, unadulterated flaming)
Article-I.D.: rabbit.1270
Posted: Thu Mar 24 15:58:26 1983
Received: Sat Mar 26 08:13:51 1983
References: <3322@cbosgd.UUCP>


	I've heard, and have been hurt by, the prejudice against
engineers too many times to allow JG to get away with his flatulent
dismissal of engineers as illiterate boors.  His article, I am
sad to say, is representative of most of the scientific establishment.
I have found that, when dealing with "scientists", I must give my
title as 'researcher' rather than engineer, for when I mention that
my background is engineering, I find myself ignored, ridiculed, and
generally used as the butt of whatever "ethnic" jokes are popular at
the time.
	I would like to discuss a few of the points of deliberate
misinformation that JG makes about engineers.  His first, upon which
he bases his entire "communication" argument, is that engineers
cannot spell.  (Please note that he extends the typographical errors
of ONE engineer, who is after all, too busy trying to clean up
the mess that the scientists left for him/her, to worry about errors
that do not disable communication, to the entire population of engineers.)
I, personally, am from a lower class background, with mostly second rate
schooling (except for a few unusual individuals <to whom I regularly give
thanks>), with little training in the 'arts'.  My spelling, use of
grammar, and the like is  not as good as I would prefer.  I urge
the reader to examine this article for such, <I have spotted one 
instance of incorrect spelling, punctuation, or grammar to this
point in this note, which I shall leave for JG to attack.>,
and draw whatever conclusions that he or she may about the literacy of
this engineer.  
	The second point, that which states that "Engineers cannot communicate"
I believe to be similarly refuted by this note.  I trust that I have,
by this time, conveyed both my opinion of Mr. JG's prejudices, and
my unhappiness with them.
	His third point, that engineers are not worthy of consideration,
if taken seriously, could be rebutted by pointing out his need to eat,
sleep, and live in an environment conducive to human life. It is clear,
however, that he made the argument merely to inspire rage and incoherency
in the reader, so that he might have the reader prove his point for him.
This challenge I refuse.
			Don't ask ME to fix what YOU break
			John Galt  (aka Lucius Gil Jones)