🚀 go-pugleaf

It might be a goood idea to delete all the kooky newsgroups from the
address field before posting further on this topic (e.g.
alt.alien.visitors,  alt.paranet.ufo, etc.), which may help stem a
flood of garbage (not yet seen in this actually rather interesting
exchange, but a likely development with such wide cross-posting), and
then (after decent notice) delete bionet.neuroscience, leaving it where
it probably belongs, i.e. in sci.physics.

Correction to Gene Douglas: no, it is not a psychology group; it is a
neuroscience group.  As a psychologist, I can tell you that 90% of my
psychologist colleagues  (rough estimate, based on numbers of members
in various APA divisions and personal observation also) would find the
subject matter of neuroscience rather foreign and baffling.


F. Frank LeFever, Ph.D.
New York Neuropsychology Gropup



In <369D47BF.A20C08B@ix.netcom.com> Richard Sargent
<dsargent@ix.netcom.com> writes: 
>
>
>
>Gene Douglas wrote:
>
>> Hey, you guys, go away!  This is a psychology group!
>
>....
>
>You see, Gene, it started like with a post entitled "Help", (which I
can't
>for the life of me recall the original point of discussion), but we
were
>NOT discussing zero point energy.  We got sidetracked.  Introduce a
new
>topic that's on your mind.  Obviously a handful of people can't
>'singlehandedly' change the dominating topics in a newsgroup.  It's
only
>illusory that the ng has suffered subject confusion.  I am certain the
>newsgroup veterans will oppose any major change in discussion.
>
>Peter L. Sargent
>