THE PHILOSOPHY OF BIO-RELIGION
jimmy at jradams.demon.co.uk
Tue Aug 10 13:03:26 EST 1999
In article <37AFA13E.F63B088E at sandpiper.net>, Jim Balter
<jqb at sandpiper.net> writes
>jimmy adams wrote:
>> In article <uXP7eIh4#GA.244 at cpmsnbbsa02>, Ken Collins
>> <KPaulC at email.msn.com> writes
>> >Jim Balter wrote in message <37AD1C2C.7B6624B5 at sandpiper.net>...
>> >>> >[...]
>> >>It is true that it seems that way to some persons ignorant
>> >>of the relevant physics -- like, say, that there's a sun in the sky.
>> >there's not an 'atom' in the entirety of physical reality, in cluding those
>> >which comprise Sun, that doesn't 'see' the one-'map' that is wdb2t, and
>> >'behave' in rigorous accord with respect to such.
>> You are posting your quarrel in talk.philosophy.humanism; it has
>> absolutely nothing to do with us.
>> We have enough postings from the scientifically illiterate (and the
>> plain illiterate, come to that) to be going on with.
>> Would you be so kind as to omit us from your further fractiousness?
>Due to a bug in the design of Usenet, messages do not indicate
>which the author subscribes to that the message was posted to.
>Therefore, once someone crossposts, the thread lives on in all those
>groups until it dies a natural death. That's the way it's been for
>years. You have a simple remedy -- don't read
>messages with the title "Re: THE PHILOSOPHY OF BIO-RELIGION".
>If you really want to waste your time railing against this situation,
>at least direct your complaint to whoever initially crossposted
>to all those groups. But it really won't help -- someone else
>will do the same thing soon enough.
><J Q B>
Since there are only two people posting, this seems a clear indication
of where the problem started, and where the remedy lies.
More information about the Neur-sci