Re: [Noise] Re: Missionaries (was: "Mormon Asshole?" re: GAK)

At 01:04 AM 10/9/96 -0700, you [Paul S. Penrod] wrote:
:

:I suggest you [Alan Olsen] RTFM again. It was a commentary on the sad state of 
:scientific practice as germain to today's egomanical pirannah who inhabit 
:the domain of the "scientist". To publish is to exist, and the first rule 
:is "draw your curves, then plot your points." The second is "Thou shalt 
:not critisize your mentor."
:
:Save the anti-religion rhetoric for someone who gives a damn.
:
:...Paul


Well, Paul, obviously you do. Otherwise why try to justify some thinly
disguised pseudo-scientific mumbo jumbo as "a commentary on the sad state of
scientific practice."

As Alan said, "I suggest you take your beliefs to talk.origins."

BTW, what DOES this have to do with crypto, or privacy, or personal
freedoms, or MORMONS for that matter?

Alec

On Wed, 9 Oct 1996 camcc@abraxis.com wrote:

> At 01:04 AM 10/9/96 -0700, you [Paul S. Penrod] wrote:
> :
> 
> :I suggest you [Alan Olsen] RTFM again. It was a commentary on the sad state of 
> :scientific practice as germain to today's egomanical pirannah who inhabit 
> :the domain of the "scientist". To publish is to exist, and the first rule 
> :is "draw your curves, then plot your points." The second is "Thou shalt 
> :not critisize your mentor."
> :
> :Save the anti-religion rhetoric for someone who gives a damn.
> :
> :...Paul
> 
> 
> Well, Paul, obviously you do. Otherwise why try to justify some thinly
> disguised pseudo-scientific mumbo jumbo as "a commentary on the sad state of
> scientific practice."

No, I don't. I've heard it all before. I'm not interested in what you or 
anyone else believes from a religious point of view - with regards to 
this list. That's your business. What I object to is the automatic pigeon 
holing that takes place the minute someone openly questions the religion 
of scientific method. Suddenly one's percieved personal beliefs come 
under negative scrutiny with the presumption that the accusor need not 
answer to the same - because they are defending truth, honor and the 
faith. Historically, it used to be called the Inquisition.

Pseudo-scientific? in what regards? Is Geophysics pseudo-scientific? Is 
geology pseudo-scientific? I've been paid well to persue seismic studies, 
plus other geological persuits under both categories for several years, so 
I think I can argue the venue on the merits of accepted operation without 
having to drag religion into it. Secondly, having some passing familiarity w
ith Alan Olsen's background, I am not aware of any paid or unpaid 
experience in these fields of expertise.

> 
> As Alan said, "I suggest you take your beliefs to talk.origins."
> 

No thankyou. Take this private if you want to persue it further. 

> BTW, what DOES this have to do with crypto, or privacy, or personal
> freedoms, or MORMONS for that matter?
> 

Crypto - in an oblique manner, it hints at the blinders scientists can 
unwittingly place upon themselves in persuit of a goal - especially when 
that goal involves tenure. Publish or perish. Instituitonal offerings 
many times can be inferior to private persuits for just that reason alone.

privacy  - this is what's at stake every time you use crypto. Can you 
trust your tools?

personal freedoms - a broad issue that covers much more than just crypto. 
How much history do you know? That more than anything else will determine 
how willing you are to fight for your freedoms, and how fast you will be 
willing to give them up.

Mormons - nothing.

....Paul

camcc@abraxis.com wrote:
> At 01:04 AM 10/9/96 -0700, you [Paul S. Penrod] wrote:
> :I suggest you [Alan Olsen] RTFM again. It was a commentary on the sad
> :state of scientific practice as germain to today's egomanical
> :pirannah who inhabit the domain of the "scientist". To publish is to
> :exist, and the first rule is "draw your curves, then plot your
> :points." The second is "Thou shalt not critisize your mentor."
> :Save the anti-religion rhetoric for someone who gives a damn.

> Well, Paul, obviously you do. Otherwise why try to justify some thinly
> disguised pseudo-scientific mumbo jumbo as "a commentary on the sad
> state of scientific practice."
> As Alan said, "I suggest you take your beliefs to talk.origins."
> BTW, what DOES this have to do with crypto, or privacy, or personal
> freedoms, or MORMONS for that matter?

It has to do with this: That religion is connected here, because people 
are connected here.  Religion is the people's way, when they're not 
getting precise answers about crypto, to offload their frustration onto 
the/a superior being, who has no such limits.

When the best thing you can say about PGP, the Golden Calf of crypto, is 
that it "may very well" or "probably will" protect your messages from 
scrutiny by the NSA et al, you can always fall back on God when they 
come and pick you up to take you to the "family camp", like you've seen 
on so many of those TV docudramas.

Would you folks *please* cut this thread? It has gone on long enough. Too 
long, in fact.

--Lucky

Lucky Green <shamrock@netcom.com> writes:

> Would you folks *please* cut this thread? It has gone on long enough. Too
> long, in fact.

Yes. Timmy May started it, but flaming the mormons.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps