From: D. C. Sessions on
Peter Bowditch wrote:
> Citizen Jimserac <Jimserac(a)> wrote:
>>And as we've pointed out MANY TIMES to the Aunties,
>>the woo-ites often get it wrong. One major instance
>>was the widespread attacks against a researcher who dared propose that
>>ulcers were caused by something other than just stress
>>and/or diet -> like an identifiable BACTERIUM.
> You would have some evidence of these "widespread attacks", I suppose.
> (Actually, I don't suppose it because it never happened and you, as
> usual, are just talking nonsense.)

As far as I can tell, CJ doesn't see any difference between
"That's interesting, but how about some evidence" and
"Get lost, bum, and don't come back you worthless bucket of
oozing waste." Maybe because in his case the first is so
regularly followed by the second.

| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs(a)> -+
From: Jan Drew on
> Mark Probert wrote:

From: Jan Drew on

"Peter Bowditch" <myfirstname(a)>

Insult and off topic removed.
From: Jan Drew on
Jimmy is not the subject.

From: Mark Probert on
On Sep 12, 6:44 am, "D. C. Sessions" <d...(a)> wrote:
> Mike wrote:
> > Mark Probert wrote:
> >>> Also, Dr.Gordon is not afraid to offend powerful business interests.
> >> Neither is Orac. He confonts the wild wacky world of woo regularly.
> > Does not require any courage. They do not control grants to his
> > research.
> No less than pharmaceutical companies do.  Nice symmetry there.

PubMED has a notice that anyone who is funded by NIH must publish
their papers. This is not new.

However, it highlights the fact why the wild wacky woo-meisters will
not apply for those millions at NACCAM. If the results do not support
their business, they may have toget a realjob.