rlr@pyuxn.UUCP (Rich Rosen) (06/05/84)
> Re: recent submission to net.origins: > Larry, I may have been out of line calling you a liar. I should > give you the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps you are a completely > sincere fool. > Alan S. Driscoll > AT&T Bell Laboratories > > No, Alan, you should have just kept quiet, both times. We are not > fooled or amused; the above is no apology. The net should not be used > for the exchange of public insults. Such usage will destroy it. If > you feel that you must give public response to the lack of sense in > someone else's articles, it is more effective to do so with > intelligence and politeness than with sarcasm and venom. Rather than > call someone a fool and hope he goes away, why not try to help him > reach an understanding of your position? This group exists for > discussion, not merely for self-congratulation. If you still feel an > uncontrollable urge to vent spleen, please do it privately by electronic > *mail*. Do you expect us to applaud your arbitrary put-downs? Can't > we maintain a level of discussion higher than a resort to name-calling? > Well I guess we can't, huh. A reasonable perusing of the original discussion will show that Mr. Driscoll is quite justified in questioning Mr. Bickford's truthfulness regarding this matter. He was asked to define the "scientific"-ness in scientific creationism and has repeatedly failed to do so. The "name-calling" was little more than a comment on Mr. Bickford's failure to provide anything to back up his statement. Those who can't back up what they have to say may very well fit into one of the categories Mr. Driscoll has described. -- "Submitted for your approval..." Rich Rosen pyuxn!rlr