Re: sci.anthropology.paleo

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Bob Whitaker: "Re: WHITAKER'S LAWS OF SOCIAL SCIENCE"
• Previous message: philip: "Who killed neanderthal man?"
• Maybe in reply to: D K Murray: "sci.anthropology.paleo"

D K Murray <sw.library@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
>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.

Yeah, the ng has been a real quick read lately :-(

Deb
>
>
>
>

• Next message: Bob Whitaker: "Re: WHITAKER'S LAWS OF SOCIAL SCIENCE"
• Previous message: philip: "Who killed neanderthal man?"
• Maybe in reply to: D K Murray: "sci.anthropology.paleo"