sci.anthropology.paleo

D K Murray (sw.library@zetnet.co.uk)
Tue, 28 Jan 1997 14:49:43 GMT

Oh no oh no oh no... Ed Conrad was quite bad enough, but at least his
arguments had just about enough coherence to follow them and enable
the posting of reasoned rebuttals.

The racist postings currently appearing in this group:

1) Have even less place in sci.anthropolgy.paleo than fossil fuels.

2) Are not coherent enough to term arguments, and are backed by no
evidence whatever (otherwise they would deserve reasoned response.)

3) Express (I use this word in it's loosest sense) obnoxious views
presented (again, loosest sense) as facts.

Rather than responding and encouraging further excretions, would it
not be better to ignore them? I'm finding it increasingly difficult
to try to broaden my knowledge of paleoanthropology here.

Yrs. Diarmid.