Date: 8/10/98 15:35
Dear Editor ,
Ray Levy (issue 17 Oct 8 -21) says that your letters column should be free of religious debate.If only it could be.I'm afraid he is being too simplistic.It is the presence of Uri Geller in your magazine having a forum for his misinformed,backward views that sparks letters of rebuke.The"different perspective",as Mr Levy puts it,that Mr Geller brings is one of disinformation.
Computers are not "sensitive to being hated" and "negative thoughts" do not "create binary malfunctions",this is just Mr Geller's (issue 16) warped idea of how the world works. As long as people are prepared to "wait and see" and give credibility to these self-publicising, money-spinning, ignoramuses, they will have a forum to spread their ill-informed view of the world,so why should not respondents to Computeractive have a forum to dispute Mr Geller's idiocy,so that people like Mr Levy don't find themselves believing Uri Geller's rubbish?
As Howard Edwards pointed out (Computeractive July 30),beliefs such as those as Mr Gellers have a sinister side,not least that people are prepared to listen to unproven hearsay and accept it as valid because it is written by a well known spokesperson in a magazine. By letting "everyone have a right to their opinion",Mr Levy,and your magazine,are helping to undermine the very foundation of the technological society that brought the computer about.
There is a simple way to render your letters page free of religious,belief or personal conviction type letters;GET RID OF URI GELLER,then maybe we can talk about computers as Mr Levy suggests,without interference from those who have a poor understanding of the physics of the world,or who have vested interests in promulgating their own self-serving nonsense.
Yours sincerely, D.L. Borrell
P.S. GET RID OF URI GELLER