Re: Omega 6 PUFAs?
Chris is is not just acquainted with the nature of evidence and the
scientific method: he is *qualified* "to have a conversation".
What are *your* qualifications?
I realize I *did* ask you that question before, and you still owe us
And who is "us". I suspect it's Bob, poopsy and Sterinnigncles. All
have the same M.O.
Spew personal insults and refuse to discuss specifics. On the rare
occasions when they (you) do post something with content - they (you)
resort to infantile name calling on any response that deserves a
Basing objections on "appeal to authority" is a couple of hundred
years out of date if you don't know. Have you thought about objecting
on the merits of the actual discussions? All you've demonstrated now
and in the past is that you have no desire/capacity for any real
Why don't you ask Chris if he thinks I'm not qualified to post because
he suspects I'm not properly credentialed. Better yet ask Chris if
credentials make any difference in any of the discussions I've had
It's curious that you are so demanding of " technical qualifications"
but are so bereft of any common sense/technical capabilities. The fact
that you think "qualifications"have any significant relevance to any
of the discussions I've had with Chris is proof positive of this.
- Prev by Date: Re: bg 94 2 hrs after spaghetti
- Next by Date: Re: [off-topic] internet-enabled thermostat
- Previous by thread: Re: Omega 6 PUFAs?
- Next by thread: Re: Omega 6 PUFAs?