🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <8eROWxG00WB7AfWl5g@andrew.cmu.edu>, st0o+@andrew.cmu.edu (Steven Timm) writes:
> have on the universe.  Why not the space potato?  It's no more exotic
> than many particles which well-known theorists have published papers on, and 
> are no more likely to exist than the space potato.

I can agree with the inappropriate newsgroups for the original post (and, no
doubt, my followup :-) but I don't see why this person's "truth" is any more
"rubbish" than what is written in other more popular works e.g. the bible.

If this person had quoted from the bible, he would have been told to post
elsewhere, but he wouldn't be flamed for posting "rubbish".

Why is this?

I see the bible and the original post in the same light: I'm open minded enough
to read anything once, but after that there is nothing in it for me.

Jim.