 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Alternative / January 2008Peter Moran - Where's the "Expert" Critique?
Peter Moran: I couldn't help but notice that you, as the usual Barrett lackey does, AVOIDED answering my questions about "specifics" where you can show Hulda Clark to be, as you stated, "one of the worst cancer charlatans in history. " I have in front of me, after some searching, the 1999 edition of Hulda Clark's "The Cure for All Advanced Cancers." In short, Peter Moran, I'm calling you out. I'm going to ask you a series of questions about this book, and I expect you to provide real scientific information proving your "one of the worst cancer charlatans in history" statement, right here, and right now. Frankly, I think YOU are the charlatan, and I'm about to prove it - and you're going to help me. So, let's begin. (1) Clark's first chapter is called "The Tumor." Show me scientifically where she is being a "charlatan" here. Show me where she is being scientifically incorrect. (2) Clark's second chapter is called "The Tasks." Show me scientifically where she is being a "charlatan" here. Show me where she is being scientifically incorrect. (3) Clark's third chapter is called "Pain Killing." Show me scientifically where she is being a "charlatan" here. Show me where she is being scientifically incorrect. (4) Clark's fourth chapter is called "Dental Work." Show me scientifically where she is being a "charlatan" here. Show me where she is being scientifically incorrect. (5) Clark's fifth chapter is called "Tumor Shrinking Diet." Show me scientifically where she is being a "charlatan" here. Show me where she is being scientifically incorrect. (6) Clark's sixth chapter is called "Safe Surroundings." Show me scientifically where she is being a "charlatan" here. Show me where she is being scientifically incorrect. (7) Clark's seventh chapter is called "Supplements." Show me scientifically where she is being a "charlatan" here. Show me where she is being scientifically incorrect. (8) Clark's eighth chapter is called "21 Day Cancer cure program." Show me scientifically where she is being a "charlatan" here. Show me where she is being scientifically incorrect. (9) Clark's ninth chapter is called "Reading Your blood Test Results." Show me scientifically where she is being a "charlatan" here. Show me where she is being scientifically incorrect. (10) Clark's tenth chapter is called "Reading Your X-Rays." Show me scientifically where she is being a "charlatan" here. Show me where she is being scientifically incorrect. (11) Clark's eleventh chapter is called "The True Story of." Show me scientifically where she is being a "charlatan" here. Show me where she is being scientifically incorrect. (12) Clark's twelth chapter is called "Food Rules." Show me scientifically where she is being a "charlatan" here. Show me where she is being scientifically incorrect. (13) Clark's thirteenth chapter is called "Recipes." Show me scientifically where she is being a "charlatan" here. Show me where she is being scientifically incorrect. (14) Clark's fourteenth chapter is called "Synchrometer Biochemistry.." Show me scientifically where she is being a "charlatan" here. Show me where she is being scientifically incorrect. Frankly Peter, I don't think you have it in you. Neither intellectually, or knowledgably. I think you are just one more third rank wanna-be quackbuster bullshit artist. Well, you've been called out. Waiting not too patiently in California... Tim Bolen >Peter Moran: > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >right now. Frankly, I think YOU are the charlatan, and I'm about to >prove it - and you're going to help me. Gee, Timmy, I think your tape loop of stupid questions is damaged, as you keep posting the same idiotic "challenge" every couple of weeks. So, I'm calling you out. I say you're an idiot who can't keep himself from posting the same garbage over and over again. I'm going to prove it, and you're going to help me -- by posting the same garbage over and over again. Amused in America, -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down on?" -- Bill Maher > Gee, Timmy, I think your tape loop of stupid questions is damaged, as > you keep posting the same idiotic "challenge" every couple of weeks. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > it, and you're going to help me -- by posting the same garbage over > and over again. Gosh Davey---are you sure you have a Ph.D-? You certainly do not write like you have one... I'm calling you out--what is your Ph.D in and where did you get it? I'd like you know since it would appear you aren't a huge alternative medicine fan what your "expertise" level is. >> Gee, Timmy, I think your tape loop of stupid questions is damaged, as >> you keep posting the same idiotic "challenge" every couple of weeks. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >Gosh Davey---are you sure you have a Ph.D-? You certainly do not >write like you have one... How would you know? Have you done some sort of comparitive study of the writing styles of PhDs versus non-PhDs? I'd be fascinated to know why you've reached your conclusion. >I'm calling you out--what is your Ph.D in and where did you get it? >I'd like you know since it would appear you aren't a huge alternative >medicine fan what your "expertise" level is. My PhD isn't in a health-related field, and is not relevant to the discussion. I mention it only to show that I can, in fact, do things like research, not to try to claim I'm a health expert. In any case, I'm not going to tell you where I got it, or in what field, because doing so would make it much easier for our little harassers, like Timmy, to hassle me. No thanks. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down on?" -- Bill Maher >>> Gee, Timmy, I think your tape loop of stupid questions is damaged, as >>> you keep posting the same idiotic "challenge" every couple of weeks. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >the writing styles of PhDs versus non-PhDs? I'd be fascinated to know >why you've reached your conclusion. I wonder if "PhD writing style" is so obvious that it applies to all PhDs, or could it be possible that, for example, a physics PhD related to discrepancies in the predicted energy contained in the Higgs boson might be quite dissimilar to a PhD on comparative syntax of New Guinea aboriginal languages, or one about economic modeling of command economies, or another dealing with the evolution of marsupials at the expense of placental mammals in Australia, or one on the progressive modification of standard speech patterns since 1611, or the optimisation of query strategies in unpredictable searches of large bodies of dissimilar data, or one about the mathematical structures underlying Bach's canons and how they are expressed in the work of Bartok, or perhaps one on the theological allusions in pre-Raphaelite European painting? Or maybe Kent Hovind's doctorate about creation from Patriot University or the one I bought for $25 on the Internet? Yep. All the same. I don't know why people bother with the long process when all you have to do is tell MS Word to create a new document using the "phd.dot" template, change the front page and the list of references, do a quick find'n'replace across the text and Bob's your uncle.  SignaturePeter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com > In article <c80b6267-972d-4a35-99f6-00a4a4f90...@p69g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>, > > How would you know? Have you done some sort of comparitive study of > the writing styles of PhDs versus non-PhDs? I'd be fascinated to know > why you've reached your conclusion. I've been around enough of them in my time in the educational setting. Most of them have been very polite, and that certainly is not something that is coming through here with you. > My PhD isn't in a health-related field, and is not relevant to the > discussion. I mention it only to show that I can, in fact, do things > like research, not to try to claim I'm a health expert. Ofcourse it is relevant to the discussion because you certainly highly of your opinions by your tag line. Your ego smells like either Engineering or Chemistry. How close am I? Anyone can research, you do not have to prove that to anyone; look at what Erin Brokovich did while working as a file clerk to expose what was going on in Hinckley, CA? You don't have to be a rocket science, nor do you need a Ph.D to do it. > In any case, I'm not going to tell you where I got it, or in what > field, because doing so would make it much easier for our little > harassers, like Timmy, to hassle me. No thanks. I'm not intimidated by Lassie's owner, nor should anyone else be. Look at all of this as humorous, it will put a better prespective in all of the discussions here. Do you think he is going to show up at your front door? Ha...I think his bark is way worse than his bite. > -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net > These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. > "Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down on?" > -- Bill Maher > In article > <c80b6267-972d-4a35-99f6-00a4a4f90fa8@p69g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net In other words, David may very well not have a PhD. So what else is new? > In article <c80b6267-972d-4a35-99f6-00a4a4f90...@p69g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>, > [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > "Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down on?" > -- Bill Maher David (or whatever your real name is): Debbee is correct. Everyone gives off their own persona in their writing style. Yours, for a little while, was hard to identify, for I just don't see it that much. You write in that "whiny bitch fag" sort of way, angry with the world, so to speak. And I very much doubt that you have PhD. My guess is that you baely finished High School - and i nthat High School no one would remember you. Nor are you connected to the educational world in any way, except maybe as a janitor in a Community College. You are one of those people with no real life, who peers out at the world. So, are you weaing silk panties today, David (or whatever your real name is)? Curious in California... Tim Bolen On Jan 15, 6:11 am, jurim...@yahoo.com wrote: > And I very much doubt that you have PhD. My guess is that you baely > finished High School - and i nthat High School no one would remember [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > So, are you weaing silk panties today, David (or whatever your real > name is)? Dear Lassie's owner, so I won't be labeled a hypocrite----I'm guessing that David really does have a Ph.D. Probably like he says, in Research. But I am guessing, based on his writing style, that he is really into music. That would explain the moodiness you are misinterpreting for something else. That also explains the writing styles of others who have a background in classical composers and the like. I think we can curtail the use of "silk panties," can we not? : That also explains the writing styles of others who have a background : in classical composers and the like. Is my writing style due to my "background in classical composers" (whatever that is), my Ph. D., or my having taken the trouble to read Strunk & White? Does your expression of your opinions about other people's writing styles now give me the right to express my opinions of your writing style? (if "style" is a word that can legitimately be used in that context) ----- Richard Schultz schultr@mail.biu.ac.il Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University ----- "You don't even have a clue about which clue you're missing." >In article ><6b30fd65-c3ec-4748-8d12-9ca512b42b6a@t1g2000pra.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >now give me the right to express my opinions of your writing style? (if >"style" is a word that can legitimately be used in that context) Ah, another Strunk & White fan. I gave my dad a copy so he could lend it to his graduate students when they were working on their theses. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down on?" -- Bill Maher >>In article >><6b30fd65-c3ec-4748-8d12-9ca512b42b6a@t1g2000pra.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >Ah, another Strunk & White fan. I gave my dad a copy so he could lend >it to his graduate students when they were working on their theses. One of the things I like about S&W is how small the book is, illustrating how little you really need to know to get things right. SignaturePeter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com >>>In article >>><6b30fd65-c3ec-4748-8d12-9ca512b42b6a@t1g2000pra.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >One of the things I like about S&W is how small the book is, >illustrating how little you really need to know to get things right. For those interested, a new edition appeared recently. It really is a wonderful book. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down on?" -- Bill Maher > >>Ah, another Strunk & White fan. I gave my dad a copy so he could lend > >>it to his graduate students when they were working on their theses. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > For those interested, a new edition appeared recently. It really is a > wonderful book. People who actually know something about the English language tend to hate it, some vehemently so, e.g. http://serendipity.lascribe.net/ling-lang/2005/10/illustrated-elements-of-style/ It appears that Strunk and White is to English usage what quackery is to health, so I'm rather shocked to hear it described as wonderful. Adrian. >> >>Ah, another Strunk & White fan. I gave my dad a copy so he could lend >> >>it to his graduate students when they were working on their theses. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >It appears that Strunk and White is to English usage what quackery is >to health, so I'm rather shocked to hear it described as wonderful. I'll need more than some malcontent at the University of Pennsylvania to be convinced that we have a trend here. I just hunted up some reviews of the book on the web and most were laudatory. White was a marvelous stylist -- anyone who wants to put him down had best be able to write better than White. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down on?" -- Bill Maher > >People who actually know something about the English language tend to > >hate it, some vehemently so, e.g. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > marvelous stylist -- anyone who wants to put him down had best be > able to write better than White. Pullum is by far the most vocal of White's critics that I know of (and others I know of are associates of Pullum), but I predict that if you would find a trend, provided you looked among linguists (particularly those who specialise in English grammar) and not English departments (in many but not all respects, I tend to the view that the one is to the other as astronomy is to astrology). But I would not expect any critics of White to argue that he is a bad writer; I would expect them to argue, as Pullum does, that White's talent with words consists substantially of ignoring his own advice. Is Pullum's opinion worth taking into account? I'll leave you to decide that, but the fact that he is one of the two chief authors of "The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language" is, I think, relevant to the question. ( I have a copy of the 1842-page tome on my shelf, and have even read parts of it.) Adrian. > Is Pullum's opinion worth taking into account? I'll leave you to > decide that, but the fact that he is one of the two chief authors of > "The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language" is, I think, relevant > to the question. ( I have a copy of the 1842-page tome on my shelf, > and have even read parts of it.) Grammar is not style, and expertise in analyzing a language does not imply understanding how to create with it. This is a particularly clear distinction from the CS perspective: experts in language theory aren't necessarily great programmers, nor are they great at teaching others to program. | Bogus as it might seem, people, this really is a deliverable | | e-mail address. Of course, there isn't REALLY a lumber cartel. | | There isn't really a Santa Claus, but try www.santaclaus.com. | +--------------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> --------------+ 8'FED wrote: > > Is Pullum's opinion worth taking into account? I'll leave you to > > decide that, but the fact that he is one of the two chief authors of [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Grammar is not style, and expertise in analyzing a language does > not imply understanding how to create with it. But if the advice on style is stated in the language of grammar, then expertise in analysing a language is relevant to detecting: - whether or not the person giving the advice actually follows their own advice. - whether or not other people who are noted for being great writers write in the advised manner. If the answer is "no" and "no", is the style guide actually of any use? Adrian. > Ah, another Strunk & White fan. I gave my dad a copy so he could lend > it to his graduate students when they were working on their theses. To bring the subject back (at least distantly) to MHA: http://bobsfridge.com/virus.html | Bogus as it might seem, people, this really is a deliverable | | e-mail address. Of course, there isn't REALLY a lumber cartel. | | There isn't really a Santa Claus, but try www.santaclaus.com. | +--------------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> --------------+ > Does your expression of your opinions about other people's writing styles > now give me the right to express my opinions of your writing style? (if > "style" is a word that can legitimately be used in that context) > > ----- Ofcourse you can write however you want to write--- You could even sing "Rocky Mountain High, Colorado" if you want to while you are typing for all I care! >> Does your expression of your opinions about other people's writing styles >> now give me the right to express my opinions of your writing style? (if [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > while you > are typing for all I care! Years ago I saw John Denver in concert at Red Rocks State Park in the Rockies. When he sang Rocky Mountain High, they shut all the lights and Denver appeared in the background... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Rocks_Amphitheatre > Years ago I saw John Denver in concert at Red Rocks State Park in the > Rockies. > > When he sang Rocky Mountain High, they shut all the lights and Denver > appeared in the background... He is in Rock 'n' Roll Heaven with the rest of the greats that have passed.. Probably singing a duet with Janis Joplin or Mama Cass. On Jan 15, 6:11 am, jurim...@yahoo.com wrote: > And I very much doubt that you have PhD. My guess is that you baely > finished High School - and i nthat High School no one would remember [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > So, are you weaing silk panties today, David (or whatever your real > name is)? Dear Lassie's owner, so I won't be labeled a hypocrite----I'm guessing that David really does have a Ph.D. Probably like he says, in Research. But I am guessing, based on his writing style, that he is really into music. That would explain the moodiness you are misinterpreting for something else. That also explains the writing styles of others who have a background in classical composers and the like. I think we can curtail the use of "silk panties," can we not? Oh, party pooper! > On Jan 15, 6:11 am, jurim...@yahoo.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Oh, party pooper! Sorry Group: I'll stick by my observation about "David Wright." There is no evidence in his writing that would indicate advanced education. This person, disguising themself as David Wright, is an angry societal reject, with a very well defined inability to communicate on a normal level with peers. Hence the fake ID. There's no PhD there. It is just part of the made up persona. This "David Wright," in his/her.its normal life, I'd venture, is a person who steps off the sidewalk, eyes downcast, to avoid any sign of confrontation on a basic level. This person is DEFINITELY not an alpha male. If you leaf back through his/her communications you find a common pattern, a constant regurgitation of the same theme, sort of a mental masturbation from a mediocre mind - something copied, possibly, from a "B" movie he/she once saw. That's all there is. However, in his/her comms, there is another semi-feminine thread. Sort of an insistence on avoiding the normal masculine confrontive method, and twisting the argument into a bitchy, pissy, "I-wasn't- asked-to-the-prom," sort of mode. My guess, here, is that this person, masquerading as "David Wright" has sexual identity issues, and uses the internet anonymity to attempt to venture out into a man's world, without having to wear cotton. Concerned in California... Tim Bolen >> On Jan 15, 6:11 am, jurim...@yahoo.com wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > >There's no PhD there. It is just part of the made up persona. Hahahaha. >This "David Wright," in his/her.its normal life, I'd venture, is a >person who steps off the sidewalk, eyes downcast, to avoid any sign of >confrontation on a basic level. This person is DEFINITELY not an >alpha male. Coming from a pudgy little toad like you, I can't begin to tell you how much your insults don't sting. >If you leaf back through his/her communications you find a common >pattern, a constant regurgitation of the same theme, sort of a mental >masturbation from a mediocre mind - something copied, possibly, from a >"B" movie he/she once saw. That's all there is. You're getting less inventive with every passing day. >However, in his/her comms, there is another semi-feminine thread. >Sort of an insistence on avoiding the normal masculine confrontive >method, and twisting the argument into a bitchy, pissy, "I-wasn't- >asked-to-the-prom," sort of mode. Actually, I *was* asked to the prom. By a senior, when I was a junior. Bet that galls you too. >My guess, here, is that this person, masquerading as "David Wright" >has sexual identity issues, and uses the internet anonymity to attempt >to venture out into a man's world, without having to wear cotton. > >Concerned in California... Concerned that you can't find out who I am, which would allow you to send more of your pathetic threats my way. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down on?" -- Bill Maher > You're getting less inventive with every passing day. Arithmeticaly, hyperbolicly, exponentially? No matter how the curve goes, it's going to take extended floating point to keep track. | Bogus as it might seem, people, this really is a deliverable | | e-mail address. Of course, there isn't REALLY a lumber cartel. | | There isn't really a Santa Claus, but try www.santaclaus.com. | +--------------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> --------------+ >> On Jan 15, 6:11 am, jurim...@yahoo.com wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > has sexual identity issues, and uses the internet anonymity to attempt > to venture out into a man's world, without having to wear cotton. That is one heck of a self description, Timmie. >On Jan 15, 6:11 am, jurim...@yahoo.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >that David really does have a Ph.D. Probably like he says, in >Research. Well, you don't get a PhD in "Research." I had to *do* research to get the PhD. >But I am guessing, based on his writing style, that he is really into >music. Not *that* much. >That would explain the moodiness you are misinterpreting for something >else. >That also explains the writing styles of others who have a background >in classical composers and the like. > >I think we can curtail the use of "silk panties," can we not? Timmy is desperate to try to annoy me enough that I'll do something to allow him to identify me. He's dreaming. I don't know whether he believes what he wrote, and I don't care, either. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down on?" -- Bill Maher On Jan 14, 6:33 pm, wri...@l1000.prodigy.net (David Wright) wrote: > In article > <c80b6267-972d-4a35-99f6-00a4a4f90...@p69g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > "Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down on?" > -- Bill Maher David (or whatever your real name is): Debbee is correct. Everyone gives off their own persona in their writing style. Yours, for a little while, was hard to identify, for I just don't see it that much. You write in that "whiny bitch fag" sort of way, angry with the world, so to speak. And I very much doubt that you have PhD. My guess is that you baely finished High School - and i nthat High School no one would remember you. Nor are you connected to the educational world in any way, except maybe as a janitor in a Community College. You are one of those people with no real life, who peers out at the world. So, are you weaing silk panties today, David (or whatever your real name is)? Curious in California... Tim Bolen ROTFLOL!!! Behave, Tim! >> In article ><c80b6267-972d-4a35-99f6-00a4a4f90...@p69g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] >just don't see it that much. You write in that "whiny bitch fag" sort >of way, angry with the world, so to speak. Oh, Timmy, you become ever more pathetic. You really think I'm going to bother to react to your silly little schoolyard taunt? I don't know whether you're another Ann Coulter who thinks calling someone a 'fag' is a really devastating insult, but it certainly looks that way. >And I very much doubt that you have PhD. My guess is that you baely >finished High School - and in that High School no one would remember >you. On the contrary, I was right at the top of my class. That was fun. You'll have to take my word for it, since it's a lead-pipe cinch you were never near the top of yours. >Nor are you connected to the educational world in any way, >except maybe as a janitor in a Community College. You are one of >those people with no real life, who peers out at the world. > >So, are you weaing silk panties today, David (or whatever your real >name is)? Yep, more of the pathetic fag-baiting. I must really be getting under your skin at this point, you little fraud. Suits me just fine. You're a fake, a poseur, a charlatan who tries to give his pointless little life meaning by styling himself a "consumer advocate." The only people you're advocating for are the ones who pay you, and a wretched lot they are. I'm surprised you don't have a beard -- it amazes me you can look yourself in the mirror to shave. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down on?" -- Bill Maher I'm surprised you > don't have a beard -- it amazes me you can look yourself in the mirror > to shave. I'm thinking you have a gray and white beard, (if my ESP is working well), wear glasses and are in world of education----somewhere in PA.... > I'm surprised you >> don't have a beard -- it amazes me you can look yourself in the mirror [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >well), wear glasses >and are in world of education----somewhere in PA.... I wear contacts and the rest of your suppositions are wrong. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down on?" -- Bill Maher > I wear contacts and the rest of your suppositions are wrong. It is the world of Education, not a teacher; more in the children's healthcare resources area. >> I wear contacts and the rest of your suppositions are wrong. > > It is the world of Education, >not a teacher; more in the children's healthcare resources area. Let me guess -- you're going to run through every single possibility in the hopes of being right? I think you need to take your crystal ball in for a tuneup. It's not even close. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down on?" -- Bill Maher > I think you need to take your crystal ball in for a tuneup. It's not > even close. I'm just trying to imagine what profession you are in; you make a lot of comments out in usenetland, claim you have a Ph.D, (which I am not questioning you about, if you say you have one, I believe you); however, there is never really any substance to your postings. The substance appears to be your comments to people whom you appear to be "looking down" to speak to, as if you were above them in some manner. I know you dislike alternative medicine, especially chelation. Cannot figure out for the life of me why you hang out in places you dislike so much. DW: Ramblings! Control Yourself! Occupy your time working on a 2nd, 3rd, or whatever(?), PhD. Paul > In article <dcf9fdc1-379e-4216-8210-bca3670ec...@q77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, > [quoted text clipped - 68 lines] > > -- David Wright > In article > <dcf9fdc1-379e-4216-8210-bca3670ec959@q77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > 'fag' is a really devastating insult, but it certainly looks that > way. Sure glad David is not reacting......................... >>And I very much doubt that you have PhD. My guess is that you baely >>finished High School - and in that High School no one would remember [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > on?" > -- Bill Maher > In article > <c80b6267-972d-4a35-99f6-00a4a4f90fa8@p69g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > on?" > -- Bill Maher What happened to at copper.net? > What happened to at copper.net? I think there they are still in business, up in Ohio, or Penn..... >> What happened to at copper.net? > >I think there they are still in business, up in Ohio, or Penn..... Indeed they are. I just put the wrong address in my .sig file. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down on?" -- Bill Maher >What happened to at copper.net? Probably the same as happened to you at AOL. SignaturePeter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com > >What happened to at copper.net? > > Probably the same as happened to you at AOL. > > -- > Peter Bowditch What happened?? >> >What happened to at copper.net? >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >What happened?? I'll go real slow ... You used to have an AOL email address. Now you don't. There is nothing suspicious about someone changing their email address, but you asked a question which seemed to imply the contrary. SignaturePeter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com > You used to have an AOL email address. Now you don't. There is nothing > suspicious about someone changing their email address, but you asked a > question which seemed to imply the contrary. > > -- Peter, what business is it of anyone's what email account we have, don't have, have, don't have, etc. You could have a butt load of them....it doesn't matter, period. >> You used to have an AOL email address. Now you don't. There is nothing >> suspicious about someone changing their email address, but you asked a [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >doesn't matter, >period. Which is precisely my point. Jan made an issue out of someone changing email addresses. She does it continually. I was merely pointing out a goose and gander situation - if she thinks it is suspicious for someone to have a new address she shouldn't do it herself. I have 5 email addresses used on business cards for different entities I am involved with - work, Australian Skeptics, ACAHF, Ratbags and a small non-profit organisation which is being set up. I also have a work address which is exclusively for use to send email to be collected on my Palm Treo 750 PDA. I have a couple of Hotmail addresses, one at Gmail and two at Yahoo!. I have another set of addresses which are used for email links on web sites that I manage - these are used for sorting incoming mail only and can be and are changed within minutes of being detected by spammers. I have an address at Telstra that goes with my cable Internet account, and a new one at Optus that goes with my wireless mobile Internet account. And I have myfirstname@ratbags.com, which goes nowhere and is used here to foil spammers. I don't care how many addresses someone has, but I care when someone who has had several addresses herself criticises others for doing the same. SignaturePeter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com > Which is precisely my point. Jan made an issue out of someone changing > email addresses. She does it continually. I was merely pointing out a [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > address at Telstra that goes with my cable Internet account, and a new > one at Optus that goes with my wireless mobile Internet account. I'd kind of like you to take down an email address off one of your many websites that you state belongs to me, formerly Debbee1023@aol.com as that is not a true statement. Thanks in advance, Peter. >> Which is precisely my point. Jan made an issue out of someone changing >> email addresses. She does it continually. I was merely pointing out a [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >websites that you state belongs to me, formerly Debbee1023@aol.com >as that is not a true statement. Thanks in advance, Peter. URL please. SignaturePeter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com > >> Which is precisely my point. Jan made an issue out of someone changing > >> email addresses. She does it continually. I was merely pointing out a [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > -- > Peter Bowditch rattiebags@liarsedge.com >> >> Which is precisely my point. Jan made an issue out of someone changing >> >> email addresses. She does it continually. I was merely pointing out a [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > >rattiebags@liarsedge.com Is that Debbee's email address, Jan? I don't remember putting it on any of my pages. SignaturePeter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com > >rattieb...@liarsedge.com > > Is that Debbee's email address, Jan? I don't remember putting it on > any of my pages. Peter: Stop with the feces talk, no that address is not mine. Jan wouldn't know my email address from Adam's (pun intended). Look a little bit harder...... Its the one everyone thought was mine. You can remove the connection to Debbee1023...just fine....I bet you my employer would like that. > >> You used to have an AOL email address. Now you don't. There is nothing > >> suspicious about someone changing their email address, but you asked a [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > goose and gander situation - if she thinks it is suspicious for > someone to have a new address she shouldn't do it herself. Asking a question is making an issue???? FACT: David posted he was getting a new server. And you shouldn't make statements when you have no idea what you are blathering about. > I have 5 email addresses used on business cards for different entities > I am involved with - work, Australian Skeptics, ACAHF, Ratbags and a [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > who has had several addresses herself criticises others for doing the > same. I did NOT criticize David!! You LIAR! > -- > Peter Bowditch > >> >What happened to at copper.net? > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > You used to have an AOL email address. Now you don't. Oh, really. And you know this how?? There is nothing > suspicious about someone changing their email address, but you asked a > question which seemed to imply the contrary. Only in your so-called mind. > -- > Peter Bowditch . > > Peter: You used to have an AOL email address. Now you don't. > > Oh, really. And you know this how?? Jan, your "AOL" address is showing. If you used to have an AOL address, and now you don't, how come your AOL address is showing. (or at least part of it). What did Donovan sing...."First there is a mountain....." > . > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > address, and now you don't, how come your AOL address is showing. > (or at least part of it). Beats me. Must be some kind of magic! Somebunny from nowhere. > What did Donovan sing...."First there is a mountain....." >What happened to at copper.net? > >> Probably the same as happened to you at AOL. -- > Peter Bowditch > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > -- > Peter Bowditch Oh, really. And you know this how?? DW: I'm still dreaming of your PhD! PA In article <1192072551.975914.55...@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>, rpautrey2 <rpautr...@gmail.com> wrote: >> In article <1192034319.448581.180...@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, Actually, I'm a PhD, a level of education I'm sure you can only dream of. > > Gee, Timmy, I think your tape loop of stupid questions is damaged, as > > you keep posting the same idiotic "challenge" every couple of weeks. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > I'd like you know since it would appear you aren't a huge alternative > medicine fan what your "expertise" level is. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.