--- In [email protected], "Richard J. Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I'm still suspicious - after re-reading the relevant threads, > > > it would appear that not a single one of the respondents had > > > actually read the report published in JAMA, much less > > > the "Hoodwinked JAMA Caper" written by Skolnick. > > > > jstein wrote > > I've already corrected you on this point (which you > > knew wasn't accurate to start with). > > > I'm still suspicious - maybe you did read the JAMA article - I don't > know, but nobody on Usenet seems to be able to quote from it or to > discuss any of the salient points contained in it. I've re-read all > the relevant threads on <alt.m.t.> and <sci.skeptic> and it seems to > me like nobody actually read it. > > > And you've got the name of Skolnick's article wrong. > > > Could you post a link to the article by Skolnick or send me a copy > so I can read it? Apparently not a single respondent on Usenet read > it except for this fellow and my copy is in storage. For some reason > Skolnick's article seems to have been made unavailable. What's up > with that? >
I just posted URLs to just about everything relevant. Skolnick removed the index to his website on TM and Judy Stein, but he left the directories intact and websearches still find them.
