From: JohnDoe on
Peter Bowditch wrote:

> "marcia" <design1(a)insight.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Jan Drew wrote:
>>
>>>He doesn't know, it is just his insane need to argue.
>>>
>>>Sad he could not win a case in court... then was dishonest and disbarred.
>>
>>Having a little trouble with the concept of live & let live?
>
>
> Marcia, you have to realise that in altworld everyone with the same
> name is the same person. Jan says that this Mark Probert is that Mark
> Probert (without any evidence except that Ilena Rosenthal said it
> first), Mr William P O'Neill of the decaying Canadian Cancer Research
> Group says that the Aborigine Peter James Bowditch who was drunk at a
> football match in Darwin in 1986 is the now-white Peter James Bowditch
> who types before you.

Don't forget that in Jan's case, two people are one and the same person
when they use the same internet provider, live on the same continent
(please note: Australia and New Zealand are the same continent and
country for Jan), if they at one time during their life shared the same
continent, start posting in this group at about the same time and link
to or quote from Quackwatch.

> As your name is Marcia I must assume that you are the Marcia who is a
> judge on Australian Idol. Love your work, and have done so since you
> first appeared in Australia in the cast of Hair.
>
> Which brings us back to something else that Jan doesn't know, but that
> is a matter for another thread and another day.
From: Rich on

"Jan Drew" <jdrew1374(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:p3T9g.27097$4L1.21227(a)newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
>
> "Rich" <joshew(a)hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:s0S9g.3218$uM4.2454(a)tornado.socal.rr.com...
>>
>> "Jan Drew" <jdrew1374(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>> news:zJR9g.70804$_S7.32816(a)newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
>>> Rich is *making thing up* again..
>>>
>>> Such as:
>>>
>>> *No farmers water their fields with chlorinated water
>>>
>>> Farmers know all about organic matter. They wade through it every day.*
>>>
>>> My retired Ph.D (professor of paleobotony) brother is now a farmer.
>>>
>>> He does NEITHER of the above.
>>>
>>> In Fact, I just called him. He says no farmers anywhere water with
>>> chlorinated water.
>>
>> Isn't that what I just said?
>
> Max said:
>
> Water one set with tap water
>> and the other set with filtered water... making sure the chlorine has
>> been removed. Time after time you will see that the filtered water
>> plants will grow much better.
>
> No farmers water their fields with chlorinated water.
>
> Sounds like you were trying to contradict what he said, except there is no
> comma.

Exactly! There's no comma. The sentence means exactly what it says, that
farmers do not water their plants with chlorinated water. Thus, experiments
with chlorinated water and plants have no relevance to agricultural
practices.


>>
>> You continue to demonstrate that you cannot read for comprehension nor
>> write with clarity.
>
> I did not such thing, as usual you do nothing but insult.
>
> He is a farmer he does not wade through organic matter every day.
>
> Neither do many farmers.

Any farmer who works with farm animals has an intimate relationship with
their excrement. They do, indeed, wade through it every day. Don't forget
that you are arguing with an ex-dairy farmer here.




>
> As usual, you were making things up.


Making things up? There are lots of dairy farms near Bloomington. I suggest
you visit one and see for yourself if there isn't a bit of "organic matter"
about.
--


--Rich

Recommended websites:

http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
http://www.acahf.org.au
http://www.quackwatch.org/
http://www.skeptic.com/
http://www.csicop.org/


From: marcia on

Jan Drew wrote:
> On a different note, I see from your postings..you have problems and issues.
>
> This is not a religion ng. God Bless you. I wish you every blessing in
> getting those
>
> problems worked out.
>
> You have no history of the happenings here. Therefore, you have no clue.
>
> That's all I wish to say.
>
> Jan

I don't think *I'm* the one with problems and issues, Jan. You might
want to take a good look in the mirror. That's all I wish to say. :)

From: Mark Probert on
Jan Drew wrote:
> Mark Probert wrote:
>> Max C. wrote:
>>> Mark Probert wrote:
>>>> Max C. wrote:
>>>>> Mark Probert wrote:
>>>>>> (They would not be worn out if *S*o *C*alled *A*lternative *M*edicine
>>>>>> had some form of basis in reality.)
>>>>> So Alternative Medicine is a S C A M? Is that what you're implying by
>>>>> emphasizing those letters?
>
> NO reply. Mark can NOT answer.

Incorrect. You snipped my answer. I pointed out that Max posted
opinions, and that, according to Max, you do not have to respond to
opinions.

>
>
> Does that apply to all alternative
>>>>> therapies?
>
> NO reply. Mark can NOT answer.


Incorrect. You snipped my answer. I pointed out that Max posted
opinions, and that, according to Max, you do not have to respond to
opinions.


>
>
> Many, if not most alternative practitioners focus on
>>>>> nutrition and its role in human health. Are you saying that good
>>>>> nutrition is a scam?
>
> NO reply. Mark can NOT answer.


Incorrect. You snipped my answer. I pointed out that Max posted
opinions, and that, according to Max, you do not have to respond to
opinions.

>
> Are you saying the chiropractors are scam
>>>>> artists?
>
>
> NO reply. Mark can NOT answer.


Incorrect. You snipped my answer. I pointed out that Max posted
opinions, and that, according to Max, you do not have to respond to
opinions.

> Your sweeping generalization requires some specificity,
>>>>> because if you really believe that modern medical professionals are the
>>>>> only ones qualified to heal the human body, most readers in the
>>>>> alternative news groups will have had enough personal experience with
>>>>> alternative practitioners to think of you as a quack.
>>>>>
>>>>> You see, that's exactly what the pharma hounds and FDA lap dogs of
>>>>> yesteryear preached. Many of these "experts" testified in court that
>>>>> the absence of vitamins and minerals from the human diet could not
>>>>> cause degenerative, functional or infectious disease. Of course, we
>>>>> now know beyond a doubt that such testimony is pure rubbish. Even the
>>>>> average person on the street understands that vitamins and minerals are
>>>>> required for good health.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, what exactly do you mean by your above statement?
>
> NO reply. Mark can NOT answer.


Incorrect. You snipped my answer. I pointed out that Max posted
opinions, and that, according to Max, you do not have to respond to
opinions.

>
>>>> I am sorry, your post did not contain any facts, just your opinion.
>>> Ah, the ol' question dodge game. Sorry, but that wasn't my opinion.
>> I consider it an opinion and that is all that I need.
>
> NO replies Mark could NOT answer.


Incorrect. You snipped my answer. I pointed out that Max posted
opinions, and that, according to Max, you do not have to respond to
opinions.

>> See? I learned your dodge real good!
>
> Poor Mark.


Incorrect. You snipped my answer. I pointed out that Max posted
opinions, and that, according to Max, you do not have to respond to
opinions.

>>> It's an exact account of what happened the first time Dr. Royal Lee was
>>> hauled to court by the FDA. The FDA brought "experts" that testified
>>> in court that the absence of vitamins and minerals from the human diet
>>> could not cause degenerative, functional or infectious disease. I've
>>> listened to a lecture of Dr. Lee's explaining the entire case in
>>> detail. You can see a sample of his story here:
>>>
>>> http://www.galaxynutrients.com/category_s/39.htm
>>> "This is nothing new for Dr. Nelson. Ten years ago he, with his group
>>> of experts, testified in a similar court, that neither degenerative
>>> disease, infectious disease, nor functional disease could result from
>>> any nutritional deficiency."
>>>
>>> So, my post did not contain my opinion at all. Now, answer the
>>> questions.
>>>
>>> Max.
>
>
From: Mark Probert on
Max C. wrote:
> Mark Probert wrote:
>> I consider it an opinion and that is all that I need.
>>
>> See? I learned your dodge real good!
>
> Ah, so maybe you should cut a slit in the back of your pants so you can
> pull your tail out from between your legs. That's not a question
> dodge. It's a downright refusal to answer. What's wrong? Got no
> snappy comebacks for my questions, or just don't have the answers?

You are discussing opinions. When you have been provided facts, you call
them opinions and weasel out of the discussion.

I am now skipping the discussion part, for newsgroup efficiency, and I am

DANCING THE MAXIE!