I subscribed to this list to read about a lot of things, but grammer is
not one of them. I going to stop reading this thread not because
I am not interested in the subject, but because it has become an
argument over what the definition of a word is. Come on, we're
actual people here, not politici
Well Bob, that's certainly one way to avoid addressing an incongruity.
It's a darned good thing that there's a second ball around here so that
when you take yours and go home the rest of the world doesn't have to stop.
May poles for you and back to work for me.
Todd Swearingen
>Todd, you are r
Todd, you are repeating yourself and to be honest it is both tedious and
boring. toodles
Appal Energy wrote:
> Bob,
>
> You've surely noticed by now that I'm somewhat of a literalist. Yes,
> there are nuances to everything which can dampen the literal. But for
> claims of eradication to exist
Bob,
You've surely noticed by now that I'm somewhat of a literalist. Yes,
there are nuances to everything which can dampen the literal. But for
claims of eradication to exist in the literal sense, that would mean no
stores, no inventories, no weapons, no stockpiles and no incidents in
the huma
Appal Energy wrote:
> Bob,
>
> >> It's a speed bump at best, as are all vaccines. Some are more
> >> effective than others. We certainly haven't eradicated any maladies,
> >> despite many proclamations to the contrary over the decades.
>
> > global small pox and almost global polio?
>
> Lest
Bob,
>> It's a speed bump at best, as are all vaccines. Some are more
>> effective than others. We certainly haven't eradicated any maladies,
>> despite many proclamations to the contrary over the decades.
> global small pox and almost global polio?
Lest we forget, the claim was but a few ye
ok so I need a little more rigor here, I got my costs and benefits
reversed. Please substitute benefit/cost ratio below and it makes
sense.
bob allen wrote:
> Perry, you are mixing the issues. Careful observation with appropriate
> controls can tell one the cost, be it monetary, or in human
Perry, you are mixing the issues. Careful observation with appropriate
controls can tell one the cost, be it monetary, or in human suffering.
Likewise the same procedure will afford information on the benefit-
numbers of lives saved or money not spent on treating an infection.
The societal dec
Actually, I thought the issue was science and what we know about
vaccinations and its effects. Cost/benefit has nothing more to do with
science than do testimonials. If you want to discuss cause and effect,
kindly maintain the same standards throughout all your discussions. As
Todd points ou
nt matters for the rest of us?
In the end we must trust our own judgment to be able to separate the
wheat from the chaff.
>
>
>
>
>
>> From: bob allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
>> To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
good morning Todd
Appal Energy wrote:
> Salute Bob,
>
> > I don't think the way court proceeding are conducted is a
> > good analogy for how science is done.
>
> I wasn't thinking of court precedings when I made mention of
> "testimonials." If you'll note, a great number of medical studies re
sustainablelists.org
>To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
>Subject: Re: [Biofuel] new subject line!!! was ... Overvaccinating Pets
>Kills and Injures
>Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 19:42:32 -0600
>
>good evening Todd,
Yes, risk assessment is in the end is a subjective determination,
de
Salute Bob,
> I don't think the way court proceeding are conducted is a
> good analogy for how science is done.
I wasn't thinking of court precedings when I made mention of
"testimonials." If you'll note, a great number of medical studies rely
in part upon personal testament. Take aspirin for
good evening Todd,
Appal Energy wrote:
> Bob,
>
> > as to your post, testimonials might be good for selling
> > used cars and various and sundry nostrums, but it does
> > little or nothing to advance your point.
>
> U, it's collective "testimonials" that are oft sought out in
> trial
Bob,
> as to your post, testimonials might be good for selling
> used cars and various and sundry nostrums, but it does
> little or nothing to advance your point.
U, it's collective "testimonials" that are oft sought out in
trials. If they can be accepted en masse as evidentiary, then
cripes, what is it that folks seem to want to put my name in the subject line?
please stop- it adds
nothing to the conversation and makes searches in the archives difficult.
as to your post, testimonials might be good for selling used cars and various
and sundry nostrums,
but it does little
no comments here just want out of the limelight so to speak
Joe Street wrote:
>
>
> Michael Redler wrote:
>
>> Right-on Todd.
>>
>> There have been REAL discussions on the disposal radioactive waste in
>> any number of consumer products, in trace amounts.
>
>
> The most recent example of t
17 matches
Mail list logo
