Alan:
>You still fail to have checked that I am not only speaking for
>myself when I pass on some info but for a whole society (which
>as I have already stated many times is a breakaway group from
>the German Natural Hygiene Society).

And this means you can claim opinion as fact? Belonging to a fringe group
gives you more credibility? You are a puzzler, Alan. But whatever your
claims, you post with your own account--you are on your own when you claim
dogma is truth. Hiding in group anonymity doesn't change that. You will be
respected or not on this list because of your ideas and how you share them,
not by your claim to fame or familiarity with others of the same dubious
status.

>All of our members are raw foodists and all are successful (many
>are also internationally known and recognised), including my
>humble self.

The "big fish in a little pond syndrome" but it still shines the ego, no?
How does this mean you can state opinion as fact?

>Reading some of the posts in here leads me to
>believe that there are many more seekers than successful
>practicioners of any dietary regime and indeed, there is no
>such thing as the "perfect diet" as we do not have enough
>conclusive proof. Neither is diet alone (as I have said
>before) the answer to everything.

Sounds right on. Actually, it sounds something like the mainstream NH
groups you consider yourself so superior to.

>I am perfectly willing to discuss the pros and cons of
>anything with you as long as I (we) can provide an argument
>(or even a quote from scientific research as and when it
>may underline anything..although this is always tedious)

Especially tedious when they are not germane to the discussion.

>but I'm damned if I will talk to anybody who uses juvenile
>and immature terms such as "ignorant" when talking to a
>fellow human being (probably pursuing similar goals as
>your own).

"Ignorant" simply means you are lacking info to understand something, which
is how I see you. But, of course, you need only talk to whomever you choose.

And don't kid yourself, Alan. We are not pursuing similar goals. Not even
close. My goal is to show how short-sheeted your reasoning is by commenting
on your more absurd claims. Your goal seems to be "passing on some info"
from a fringe group about your superior thinking on matters of nutrition.
You worship your pedistal; I eat them for the minerals they contain. ;)

>OK?

Totally up to you, Alan. Think about what you're saying and how you're
saying it or expect me to point out your overboard moments when I have the
time.

>What I meant to say was "Americans often
>tend to view information (or experiences) from other
>countries as always somehow inferior to their own". In
>other words they often tend to construe information and
>experiences as "advice" and get very uppity if it does not
>fit their own idea of things. Kirt is a good example here
>(hope you are reading Kirt) and there are countless others
>with whom I have corresponded in the past.

Uppity, eh? ;) If I was more immature I guess I would have to say that I
will not respond to such a person as you who uses such juvenile and
immature terms. ;) But I would not miss a post of yours--the entertainment
value is too high. Your "apology" shows more about your bias than the
original statement. Who's uppity I wonder?

Cheers,
Kirt

Secola  /\  Nieft
[log in to unmask]