🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Sep30.092352.1@tnclus.tele.nokia.fi> hporopudas@tnclus.tele.nokia.fi writes:

>    Unfortunately scientists teach to ordinary peoples presisely what they
>  talk in private or in public situations all around the world. Ordinary
>  peoples respect all their words (mostly without any criticism).
>    This is why these 'wise teachers' are fully responsible for all their
>  words they have 'teached' to ordinary peoples.
>

Obviously, these "ordinary people" are fully not responsible for their
acceptance or non-acceptance of any "scientific" doctrine, eh? There
are plenty of scientist who can find the middle ground between science
and religion, and for those who don't: If you don't like what they say,
don't pay attention to it. The advances in science and technology prove 
that gee, something must be right about these doctrines, right?

Science merely attempts to find the truth through verifyable means, and
of those things which cannot be proved or disproved, science is silent.
The scientists themselves are free to believe what they want to after this
point, but laying the responsibility for anyone elses acceptance of 
scientists' beliefs on the scientists themsevles is unwarranted. Do you 
categorically reject the scientific method?

Do you commit blasphemy by using this network created by science?

Jim Hranicky (jfh@reef.cis.ufl.edu)