> There are a few things I'd like to know that might clarify the
> context of
> some of the discussions we've been having. A lot has been said
> recently about
> problems dealing with religious zealots, particularly creationists
> and
> especially about the problems of arguing with them.
>
> (1) What is the venu in which these arguments with creationists
> (e.g.) have
> been taking place?
> (2) Are they recent arguments or arguments that took place a long
> time ago?
> (3) What was the occasion that precipitated them?
>
> What I'm aiming at is what I think might be a helpful distinction
> among:
> (a) having an immediate problem involving creationists ...

> "Gail Futoran" NOSPAMworldnet.att.net> writes:

>> I have problems with creationism/creationists both at a personal
>> level
>> and a public level.

>
> OK

> "Allan Adler" nestle.csail.mit.edu> wrote in message
> news:y93y79ya6t9.fsf@nestle.csail.mit.edu...

>> These are basically indirect contacts with the faithful via news
>> media?

>
> Huh? We...

> "Gail Futoran" NOSPAMworldnet.att.net> writes:
>

>> "Allan Adler" nestle.csail.mit.edu> wrote in message
>> news:y93y79ya6t9.fsf@nestle.csail.mit.edu...

>>> These are basically indirect contacts with the faithful via news
>>> media?

>>
>> Huh? We - humans - interact with people at the individual level,
>> at the
>> group level, and at the societal level, at a minimum. Some of the
>> information we have about other people comes from the news media.
>> For
>> example, if my local paper reports that some State senator or
>> congressperson is pushing a "required prayer in school" law, I have
>> no
>> reason to assume the newspaper is lying about it. There is the idea
>> of
>> straight reporting of facts that can be checked. You have to ...

> Most of the rest of your post was quite arrogant,
> patronizing, and condenscending, including your
> assertion that you understand my personality based
> on a few newsgroup posts, and in particular your
> assertion that you won't read any more of my
> replies, including anything I might say to clarify
> any misunderstanding due to the way I express
> myself.
>
> [snip]
>
> Gail

> In article
> bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, Gail
> Futoran says...
>
>

>> Most of the rest of your post was quite arrogant,
>> patronizing, and condenscending, including your
>> assertion that you understand my personality based
>> on a few newsgroup posts, and in particular your
>> assertion that you won't read any more of my
>> replies, including anything I might say to clarify
>> any misunderstanding due to the way I express
>> myself.
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>> Gail

> ...