Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site cbscc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!harpo!floyd!clyde!ihnp4!cbosgd!cbscc!pmd
From: pmd@cbscc.UUCP (Paul Dubuc)
Newsgroups: net.physics
Subject: Re: creation of net.creations
Message-ID: <1311@cbscc.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 23-Dec-83 09:44:33 EST
Article-I.D.: cbscc.1311
Posted: Fri Dec 23 09:44:33 1983
Date-Received: Sun, 25-Dec-83 00:44:42 EST
References: <109@ism780.UUCP>, <136@hou2g.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories <SCCS>, Columbus
Lines: 24


    "Scientific" creationism may be many things to many people, but it is
    not physics.  And puting it under a heading of something like net.origins
    would give the missleading impression that issues like Big Bang vs. Steady
    State might be discussed.

So your objection to the name is based on prior knowledge of the subject
matter?  That's interesting.  What are the reasons why issues like Big Bang
vs. Steady State will not be discussed in net.origins?  I deliberately
chose the name so as to invite such discussion.  But I don't expect you
to believe that.  You know better that I do what my motives were, don't you?

    Frankly, I'm very pleased that net.physics has shown enough integrity to
    stand up to the creationists and their "free exchange of ideas" nonsense.
    Creationists are as interested in the free exchange of ideas as the leaders
    of the Democratic nations of Eastern Europe are in elections.

I think this amounts to not allowing creationists opportunity for free exchange
because you're sure they are not *really* interested in doing so.  I'm not
sure if most of them are either.  But I'm sure glad we have people like you
around who can warn us about what creationists are really interested in.
Otherwise we might have to consider their opinion on the matter.

Paul Dubuc