On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 08:31:28 -0500, r norman <rsn_ at _comcast.net>
wrote:
} As a rapidly aging guy brought up in the Eisenhower era to be polite
} and respectful, I find truly appalling the level of civil discourse
} all too often practiced on news groups. (Not this one so much). I
} think I made it pretty clear that neither I nor anyone else in the
} universe believes his theories. But I didn't feel it necessary to be
} rude about it.
}
I'd like it to be known that I have nothing against him and his
"theories" I only have something against him expounding them at
unsuspecting people asking serious questions. They're very often
students, and posting in a non-alt newsgroup might expect real answers
to their questions. I think they deserve the chance to find the right
answers, and that sometimes necessarily includes indicating a given
answer is wrong. If in doing so I can shorten the time it takes to
make the effect stick, and therfore decrease the long term traffic
noise level, I will.
Compare him with John Winston. John hangs out in the UFO and
paranormal groups, regularly posting things he's found along those
lines. If someone asks him a question about something he knows or has
material on, he posts it. He's been doing this for 15 years on usenet
and Fidonet before that. He's impervious to flames because he knows
he's done nothing to give people cause to be upset with him. Never has
he done the equivalent to what goes on here, such as answering every
question by claiming it's related to motion (because after all, all
energy and matter are in motion) and then relating it to Bob Lazar's
"discovery" that the anti-gravity engines in the flying saucers at
Area 51 run on element 115. I've been a major fan of John Winston (for
his behavior, not his material) for all of those 15 years. No one can
claim that in all that time he misled anyone.
