🚀 go-pugleaf

On Thu, 21 Dec 2000 11:53:07 GMT, George Hammond
<ghammond@mediaone.net> wrote:

>(bits snipped)
>
>David Knorr wrote:
>> 
>> Okay George, so I'll jump in here after the recap.
>
>[GH]:
>Dear D. Knorr:
>
>  You have emailed me privately.  I must inform you that I do not engage
>in private conversations except with recognized authorities, department
>heads, textbook authors, highly cited researchers etc.<

What a snotty, opinionated, self-important reply, full of self
importsnt intellectual vanity.  If you think that the rest of us are
unworthy of participating in a debate, what are you doing posting
questions in a public newsgroup.  DN offered some comments as to you
arguments (right or wrong, it does not matter which), perhaps he
forgot to use the 'reply to ng' function, of perhaps he was interested
in the topic enough to talk to you directly.  Either way, he does not
deserve this public attemp at a put down by someone who obviously
thinks he is better that most of the rest of us. 

> After 20 years >of research in this area and having published in the peer reviewed
>literature myself, I have concluded that it is only public scientific
>consensus that carries any weight in this discussion, unless you are
>a Nobel Laureate or something of that magnitude.

Ahh, I see.  Unless you have a brain the size of a planet you can't
play with the big boys! Presumably I am allowed to make these points
as I have had stuff published in peer-review journals.

Matt.