Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site bu-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!bu-cs!bzs
From: bzs@bu-cs.UUCP (Barry Shein)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy,net.sci
Subject: Re: Contempt prior to Investigation
Message-ID: <332@bu-cs.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 29-Mar-86 22:09:16 EST
Article-I.D.: bu-cs.332
Posted: Sat Mar 29 22:09:16 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 2-Apr-86 01:00:29 EST
Organization: Boston Univ Comp. Sci.
Lines: 25
Xref: watmath net.philosophy:4836 net.sci:684


[in reply to something I said I think, I was quoted anyhow...]
>...stupid science has
>to come along and complain that there isn't any evidence any of these
>things happen, and it just upchucks it away like it was all some garbage.
>Bummer!
>	CJ			(Charles J. Riordan - unirot!cjr)

etc etc, although it's apparent this is total satire it seems that your
satire belies a total misunderstanding of what I said (more likely you
are flailing against some other person, using me conveniently as an
excuse to grab the soapbox?) I'll keep it real simple this time.

We should in general only ACT on scientific evidence (where it applies),
but we should be careful to leave other thoughts open to discussion.
More importantly, my point really was that these two groups arguing are
using entirely disjoint sets of axioms thus making discussion somewhat
futile. (certainly not that I think AT&T is prescient or whatever you
were saying.)

Ok? thanks. I'm a human too which may come as a surprise to you.

	-Barry Shein, Boston University

If it wasn't satire then I am sorry, real sorry.