From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,6609c40f81b32989
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Thread: 1094ba,9bdec20bcc7f3687
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Thread: 101deb,e67cdb1dcad3c668
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: 
 gida07f3367d7,gid8d3408f8c3,gidbda4de328f,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news2.google.com!news.glorb.com!feeder.erje.net!news2.arglkargh.de!news.dizum.com!sewer-output!mail2news-x3!mail2news-x2!mail2news
From: Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.pl1
Subject: Re: Why is Ada considered  "too specialized" for scientific use
References: <4bc72c60$0$78575$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net>
Message-ID: <caed819e77cf773a68c51d59dfb66940@dizum.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 00:06:12 +0200 (CEST)
Mail-To-News-Contact: abuse@dizum.com
Organization: mail2news@dizum.com
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:10972 comp.lang.fortran:24751
 comp.lang.pl1:1256
Date: 2010-04-16T00:06:12+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

> | I know what you claimed; you have neither substantiated it
> 
> On the contrary, I substantiated it twice. 

Not only did you not substantiate it, you didn't even instantiate it!

Now the thread is back on-topic!