Xref: utzoo sci.physics:4243 news.admin:3319
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!think!ames!hc!lanl!unm-la!unmvax!nmtsun!tdsnsr
From: tdsnsr@nmtsun.nmt.edu ( Todd/Dr. Nethack )
Newsgroups: sci.physics,news.admin
Subject: Re: Is it time for sci.physics.only?
Summary: No, time to make talk.politics.science
Keywords: blah blah blah..
Message-ID: <1013@nmtsun.nmt.edu>
Date: 29 Aug 88 14:33:18 GMT
References: <1094@sri-arpa.ARPA> <2765@boulder.Colorado.EDU> <1189@anasaz.UUCP> <134@laffu.UUCP> <3732@polya.Stanford.EDU>
Reply-To: tdsnsr@nmtsun.nmt.edu ( Todd/Dr. Nethack )
Organization: NM. Tech.
Lines: 25
Distribution:usa

The idea that some people can invade any group deciding that knee-jerk politics
is the cheif subject of that group, is stupidity.

If the two are inseperable in your mind, then start a mailing list, or another
group to discuss the two.

Sci.physics already exists for the discussion of physics.. politics can be
used to invade any group with the concept that it is (of course) part of
the whole picture..

So is religion, and philosophy, and psychology, and behavioralism..

Do we make all groups to include this type of invasion?  Only to a degree of
reason.

Unfortunately, there are those who would prefer to psuedo-reason about meta-
logical political viewpoints, than to discuss physics.

I for one would prefer to discuss physics in sci.physics.
 
--
"Of course they'll give you an account... You know Weemba!!"
                                                              --Cliff
  ...ames!hc!unmvax!nmtsun!titan!tdsnsr / tdsnsr@titan.nmt.edu 
            Dr. Nethack: Box 3693 C/S Socorro NM. 87801