Rex:
>I'm beginning to think that if I clipped "fake, cranks, gurus, wacko" and such out
>of your dictionary, your post word-counts would drop dramatically.  Of course, you

Tom:
If you could not use the word "brix", you could not post at all.  :-)

Rex:
>So let's talk about plagiarism, another of your frequent dammits.
>...snipped...
>Is there more I should know about?  If it's
>all true, did NFL ever fess up and try to get right with the world?  Did the
>Iranian give the book rights to them?  Did they buy the book?  What really did
>happen?  Are they talking?

Tom:
The plagiarists are not talking. More to the point, the plagiarism has been
condoned or accepted by a large part of the fruitarian and fundamentalist
NH community. That shows that the fruitarian/NH community are perfectly
willing to lie to you, if it "converts" you to their cause. It also is solid
evidence that parts (but thankfully, not all) of the fruitarian/NH community
is morally and ethically bankrupt. If the leaders feel it is OK to lie
about writing a book, how can you believe *anything* they say - especially
their claims to be on a 100% raw vegan diet? As this goes to the central
question: "are the fruitarian diet gurus honest about their *actual* diet?"
the plagiarism issue is important.

Rex:
>Anyway, if plagiarism is so no-no, why is something like stealing Lewis Grizzard's
>dietary funnies and posting them here without credit OK?  Heck, it even got kudos
>from Tobacco Moony.  I say you can't have it both ways.

Tom:
I honestly don't know what you are talking about. If you see violations of
copyright on this list, you can contact the poster (or, in extreme cases,
the copyright holder).

>>Tom:
>>> make threats of violence...

Rex:
>A big no-no in my book, your book and, hopefully, the book of everyone else.  BTW,
>I'm 59, weigh 170, and *can* whip any unruly fruitarian that comes after you.  Let
>me know if you need help.  :)

Tom:
I'm 6'1" (185 cm.), ~160-165 pound (~73 kg.) and don't fear attacks by
emaciated  people.  :-)

Re: wacko crank science

Rex:
>You
>apparently are positioned in a university setting with abundant resources.
>Instead of calling 'em names, can't you make your points against adversaries by
>simply submitting better evidence when engaged in an academic dispute?

Tom:
Debunking crank science is a LOT of work. However, in due time your
question will be answered, at least in part.

Rex:
>I'm often amazed that someone as
>busy as you can almost instantly come online to rebut anything said that might,
>just might, allow someone, somewhere in the universe, to quietly whisper, in a
>dark cave, on a black night, that they are thriving on an all-raw diet.  Further,
>I think the great internet clock in the sky will verify that the lag times from my
>high-quality-fruit-is-OK messages, to your rebuttals, are generally in shaved
>minutes, not hours.

Tom:
The great Internet time clock has a time on your post of 5:21 PM Monday.
It is now ~8 AM Tuesday and I am now writing a reply. Your timing claim
is not accurate.

By the way, there is not doubt that folks can thrive, short-term, on all-raw.
I myself have been 100% raw for long periods of time. But I didn't thrive
in the long run, and as mentioned in my last post - if you dare to
critically examine claims of long-term success on 100% raw vegan,
you will find many such claims to be dubious. That is the reality
that many idealistic rawists refuse to face, and hence obsess on brix
and wild claims that all backyard fruit is sprayed to oblivion, etc.
Your repetitive claims and rationalizations get boring after awhile.

PS there may indeed be a very few people who thrive on 100% raw vegan,
long-term. Such folks appear to be quite rare. To date I have no credible
long-term success examples on fruitarian regimes, though I have heard
indirectly of one individual who claims to thrive on a diet whose
principal food is avocados - far different from the sweet fruit
based diets the extremists advocate.)

Rex:
>So, no, your judgment that I'm making a bad decision is not a factor.  If I ever
>learn the details of who hurt you so severely that you must be forever stationed
>outside raw-dom's gate with a compulsion to turn back all seekers, well *that*
>will help me make a decision.

Tom:
Spare the psychological analysis for the fruitarian extremists who are
hostile and/or make threats. They need it more than you or I.

Rex:
>Two points here: 1) the people over at Forum proved not so bad after all and, 2)
>I've had more than one private message from someone doing well on all-raw who
>won't share here because of hostility.  Shouldn't you, and perhaps other members
>of the list, think about that?  It's censorship, plain and simple, intended or
>unintended.

Tom:
The word censorship usually has a government connotation to it. This list
is not a government agency, hence the word is inappropriate. Those who
claim success, long-term, on *strict* 100% raw vegan might face some
serious questiong here. Why? Because many have claimed, but few such claims
hold up in the long run. Most fail for the reasons cited in a previous
post.

Rex:
>Tom, we're had vigorous debate here.  I expect the lurkers have noticed that my
>message is rather simplistic: stay with quality and other things seem to work OK.

Tom:
Agreed. Your message is simplistic. It is also an unproven, and arguably
false premise. I had super-high quality fruit and did not succeed,
long-term, on fruitarianism. You rationalize and refuse to face that
reality.

Rex:
>We really
>do need to sit down one day and talk about extreme poison overdoses backyard
>fruitgrowers often misapply.  Yeah, they claim "organic," but they are often
>talking through their hat.  There may be a link to your problems.  Once you
>undestand systemic, a lot falls into place.  Once you understand the selective
>intake powers of plants, a lot more clicks in.

Tom:
Yawn. More unsupported rationalizations from you. You don't seem to know
that I am a former organic gardener, and know what "systemic" chemicals
are.

Rex:
>But do lighten up!  From my chair you appear to be perpetually wound up and on
>guard as though you picture me as Ehret rising from the dead.

Tom:
I encourage you to not be so simplistic, and to avoid rationalizations
and assumptions (some of which are clearly false) about my background
and experience.

Tom Billings