When I asked for an example of my 'ad-hominen, unkind' attacks the best Malcolm
could provide was this...
"You Strongly suggested that Tony was a fool, using his own attempt to provide the information that in
using CS on animals, the animals are not usually susceptible to the placebo effect. in doing so you used a
"straw man" argument, thus employing both the "kill the messenger" and the "ad
hominem" rhetorical ploys combined. QED."
Please look at what I really said to Tony...
(But first,this is what Tony said regarding the surprise news that his CS is
only 0.54ppm)...
"Now the important thing is that this stuff works as I said. It's not just placebo,
I COULD FOOL MYSELF, but I doubt that one can fool cats, dogs and chickens all the
time... Tony"
My answer was this (and ONLY this)...
"Well I'm sorry to say it Tony but yes you probably are fooling yourself. Half a ppm
isn't going to do anything in my opinion"
That didnt seem too harsh to me. I could have said more. I could have said "No you
can't fool the animals but you could be fooling yourself that the health of the animals
is due to the CS", or something like that, but I figured my brief response was
adequate.
But the sad thing here is not really Malcolms overblown sophistry. Its the fact
that a regular poster on here, handing out advice to other members and newbies,
is claiming that half a ppm (probably dissolved in gallons of water) is
performing great things on himself, cats, dogs and chickens. But no-one but me
questions it! Instead, I'm accused of being a (whatever Malcolm meant) for
pointing it out!
David (In Australia)
--
The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver.
Rules and Instructions: http://www.silverlist.org
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
Archives:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/maillist.html
Off-Topic discussions: <mailto:[email protected]>
List Owner: Mike Devour <mailto:[email protected]>
