Erik,

I agree wholeheartedly with what you say, but Clay gives us the
opportunity to directly confront the conservative image of what the list
stands for.  This gives us a chance to debate these issues in a forum.
I enjoy wrangling with these folks, but I understand that others would
not.

What I would prefer is if Clay would keep the size of his posts to a more
managable length.  Most of what he says is cheap shots and name calling,
and if he were to stick to more substantial issues, perhaps this dialogue
would be more enlightening.  Of course he may not want to do this since
there could be no substance to his arguement.

I agree that the George Will piece is absurd to forward to this list.  But
if that is Clay's evidence for his position, then perhaps he need say no
more.

Know thy enemy.
Cheers
Chris

> I could be wrong, but there doesn't seem to be much interest among this
> list server group in this tripe you're dishing out.  I mean I purposely
> don't read George Will because of the kind of pop-culture pastiche
> exemplified by the article you have just posted -- and for the life of me,
> I can't imagine how Will is relevant for "Science as Culture."  Sacco and
> Vanzetti indeed!
>
> I just watched a recount of the HUAC hearings on TV last night, and for
> some stange reason I thought of your many posts that keep appearing on my
> email, along with the rest of the junk mail that comes along.
>
> About the only thing of substance that I've read in your posts is that you
> believe that 'postmodern' academics are ruining children's mind for
> science.  I think that is a preposterous claim -- and I can't imagine how
> it could come about by 'scientific reasoning.'
>
> At any rate, I ask you to cease and desist.  I'm joining the roster of
> those among us who are seriously considering unsubscribing to this very
> interesting newsgroup.
>
> Erik Mattila