>From: "Harvey Newstrom" <mail@HarveyNewstrom.com>
>I have tried to respond rationally and scientifically to some of
>these claims lately. I am becoming discouraged that it is a waste
>of time and leads nowhere. If people do not understand the basic
>scientific, experimental, and statistical methods, then further
>discussion rarely helps. If people do not believe in these
>methods, the situation is even worse. Time is a limiting factor
>here. It is no wonder that most readers just skip these
>arguments. Should we just ignore these challenges as they appear?
>Does that make them appear stronger or weaker than directly
>confronting them? Is there a danger of filling the Extropian
>archives with all sorts of unscientific conspiracy theories that
>are posted as if they had all our support?
>I would seriously love to hear some comment about this.
I think it's up to the individual. Personally I usually just ignore
them, and "plonk" repeat offenders. Let them eat static.
Extropy Institute, www.extropy.org
National Rifle Association, www.nra.org, 1.800.672.3888
SBC/Ameritech Data Center Chicago, IL, Local 134 I.B.E.W
Disclosure notice: currently "plonked"
"Joe Dees" <email@example.com>
"Party of Citizens"<firstname.lastname@example.org>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:10 MDT