Mime-Version: |
1.0 |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Fri, 17 Jan 2003 22:56:52 +1100 |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="us-ascii" |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
At 18:23 +1000 17/1/03, Phosphor wrote:
>His resources are laughable, at least in regards to his conclusions about
>aborigines. he used a grand total of 2 sources, one of which is an
>*experiment* over a 3 week period, another of which is Brand-Miller's paper,
>which merely states at the outset the point of view it wishes to pursue.
Come on Andrew, not even you could make such a moronic statement
and expect to get away with it. Oh, that's right. Anyone who pulls
you up on a point of fact suddenly becomes a "clown". I can feel
my skin turning white and my nose turning red already.
So I take it then that you have read all 350+ sources listed in
the bibliography to The Paleo Diet. And you know enough about this
subject to be able to conclusively state that only two of them
have any relevance whatsoever to aborigines.
None of the papers on general human physiology are relevant?
None of the papers on stone age archaeology are relevant?
None of the animal studies relating to human physiology?
None of the papers for which the author received some form of
compensation, even if only the emotional glow of having their
research published?
None of the other papers which present facts that fall outside
your narrow view of the world?
>This is the work of a clown not a credible researcher.
Oh, I think we all know where the clown is. Congratulations on
having so succinctly demonstrated that to us all.
...R.
|
|
|