S&S vs. SF in BotNS

António Pedro Marques · 23 Dec 2011, 16:28 · from 2011-December.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: entonio at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?QW50w7NuaW8gUGVkcm8gTWFycXVlcw==?=)
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2011 16:28:41 +0000
Subject: (urth) S&S vs. SF in BotNS
In-Reply-To: <4EF4AA10.6070503 at hyraxes.com>
References: <SNT123-W21DC1BC9239C77F928E875CFAB0 at phx.gbl>
	<4EF4AA10.6070503 at hyraxes.com>
Message-ID: <4EF4AC39.70005 at gmail.com>

Dave Lebling wrote (23-12-2011 16:19):
> Some on the list seem to be arguing that science is useless or on a par 
> with religious belief in terms of provability.
Some of the Lee's recent statements I've seen look a bit like that, but they 
were made in a context.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20111223/d8ff7ab1/attachment.htm>

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net