>Tom, unless my ISP's mail server is out of whack, I must have missed these
>posts on the Raw forum. Did they actually point fingers or drop names? If
>you happened have saved them, I'd appreciate it if you could forward them
>to me privately.
I receive the material from "informants" as I am not on the list. I
printed out the article that attacked me and did not save it as a
file. If you send me your snail mail address I can send a photocopy.
>BTW, are we talking about the Raw List run by JR Ellis? Generally that
>forum is pretty laid back (you may not agree from your past experiences)
>but if there has been any mud thrown your way, I'd like to find out the
>particulars and maybe get something done about it.
It was not JR's list, it was a different raw e-mail list whose moderator
runs his list like a third-world dictator. The same moderator portrays
himself as a promoter of "true" science while in fact his theories are pure
crackpot crank science. That moderator misrepresents my writings
(and those of others) on a regular basis. The same moderator
often demands hard proof for every statement he disagrees with while he
makes bogus claims for which he has little or no proof. Also,
the same moderator recently appeared to suggest that he was an example
of raw success; meanwhile I was sent a copy of a post by him that was made
less than a year ago, talking of his own binge eating (amd another post by
him, suggesting that he might be manic depressive).
Finally, the raw crank science forum exists only because the moderator was
thrown off multiple e-mail lists for a chronic inability to behave like
a civil human being. His associate, a frequent poster on the raw forum,
also presents himself as an example of science - yet his associate
was thrown off the sci-veg list in 1996, for an inability to document
his own crank science claims re: raw foods.
With hostile fanatics pretending to be "scientists" , and promoting
raw via crackpot, intellectually dishonest crank science theories,
is it any wonder that fruitarianism/raw has the reputation among
legitimate scientists, as the "lunatic fringe"?