Re: A typical scientist? (Re: Evidence . . . .

Carl J Lydick (carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU)
21 May 1995 03:47:16 GMT

In article <>, (Gil Hardwick) writes:
=In article <>, "J. P. Gilliver" ( writes:
=>Perhaps when posting a followup to something that is posted to four newsgroups,
=>you might say which one you consider to be `yours', as the rest of us don't
=>know which you mean. (I think `conference' is Compu$serve-speak for newsgroup,
=>to a first approximation.)
=Oh? And which one is "yours", John? I don't know from your material
=either which YOU mean.
=Friend Carl on the other hand knows full well what I am talking about.

Yup. Gil, who CLAIMS that he simply doesn't want the topic in
sci.anthropology, still posts his bullshit to three other newsgroups, pretty
much guaranteeing that that the thread will continue. So, is Gil a liar, or a
moron? Or both? It's got to be one of those.

Disclaimer: Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS. That's what I get paid for. My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below). So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it. If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.