Re: Dr Malcolm Ogilvie's Madness?

On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 08:55:37 +0100, Malcolm
<Malcolm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


In article <v1vr32590jm6sracibpm85ee0acms35bal@xxxxxxx>,
amacmil304@xxxxxxx writes
On Wed, 12 Apr 2006 22:15:10 +0100, Malcolm
<Malcolm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


In article <ncnq32h78gr687273kda8a9e8l85njdri0@xxxxxxx>,
amacmil304@xxxxxxx writes
Dr Malcolm Ogilvie's madness?

In a recent posting I asked Dr Malcolm Ogilvie the following question
about bird flu:

"Are you saying there's no risk to a child putting an infected faeces
in its mouth?".

He replied:

"I'm saying that any risk is virtually non-existent."

Is this man mad?

And, as usual, when Angus Macmillan realises that he has lost the
argument, he resorts to childish abuse.

It's not abuse at all, Malcolm. I think anyone who suggests a child
putting bird flu infected faeces in its mouth represents no risk is
mad.

I didn't say "no risk", Angus. You are, as you so often do, distorting
what I said and thereby lying :-(

This makes you dishonest, something you regularly accuse others of.



No Malcolm, I asked you if there was no risk and you said any risk
was virtually non-existant. which IMO is just about the same thing




Thank you for your surrender, Angus.

No surrender at all. Just an observation.

Complete and utter surrender. Thank you very much.

As I have pointed out before. It's not given so can't be taken.


And I think bird reserves that have large numbers of incoming
wildlfowl in areas where the infection has been identified and where
the source is unknown, should close to the public.

Yes, we know you think that, but all you are doing is saying things that
fit your warped anti-conservation agenda. I note that you are not
calling for public parks to be closed, even though the public can and do
come into close contact with birds and their droppings in such places,
which they do not do at reserves.

Not unless there's a high concentration of incoming birds which
obviously increases the risk.

I can see "a letter I agree with" coming on :-)

Angus Macmillan
www.roots-of-blood.org.uk
www.killhunting.org
www.con-servation.org.uk
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Dr Malcolm Ogilvies Madness?
    ... "Are you saying there's no risk to a child putting an infected faeces ... Malcolm. ... putting bird flu infected faeces in its mouth represents no risk is ... Complete and utter surrender. ...
    (uk.environment.conservation)
  • Re: Dr Malcolm Ogilvies Madness?
    ... I asked you if there was no risk and you said any risk ... You're a nut case, Malcolm and it shows. ... Not in the same concentration as reserves. ... Birds on town park lakes are often at far greater ...
    (uk.environment.conservation)
  • Re: Open letter to Dr Mel Tonkin of SWT
    ... If you're saying you didn't say that bird flu was of virtually no risk ... to humans then you're a liar. ... More childish nonsense. ... Grow up Malcolm. ...
    (uk.environment.conservation)
  • Re: Nasty Tilapia Revisted
    ... Agriculture on a raid at a Troy warehouse. ... goose and pork products from areas in China affected by bird flu, ... eliminate any risk of infection to humans. ... Anyone handling these birds is at risk. ...
    (rec.food.cooking)
  • Re: Open letter to Dr Mel Tonkin of SWT
    ... Malcolm wrote: ... another, non-native, species as acceptable. ... If you're saying you didn't say that bird flu was of virtually no risk ... to humans then you're a liar. ...
    (uk.environment.conservation)