sci.physics.electromag

On Feb 19, 9:59=A0am, john wrote:
> On Feb 17, 3:08 pm, Peter Bowditch wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Benj wrote:
> > >On Feb 12, 2:40 pm, Peter Bowditch wrote:
>
> > >> >> >So what do I know- really?
>
> > >> >> Nothing, by the look of things.
>
> > >> >So you repeat your ignorance a third time and then try to "win" the
> > >> >debate with ad hominem name-calling!
>
> > >> Why do quackery supporters almost universally fail to understand what=

> > >> "ad hominem" means?
>
> > >Why do you insist upon demonstrating your ignorance in a public
> > >forum? =A0Don't you know how to actually READ the things you post?
>
> > >*Ad Hominem* dear boy, is a latin phrase meaning "to the man" meaning
> > >in a debate an attack upon the character of the opponent rather than
> > >addressing his arguments.
>
> > Why do quackery supporters almost universally fail to understand what
> > "ad hominem" means?
>
> > > =A0Now I know you can do this: Read carefully
> > >the above statement you posted. John said "what do I know?" and you
> > >countered with "nothing by the look of things". =A0Anyone with even a
> > >modest command of the English language can easily see you said that
> > >John "knows nothing"! =A0It was an attack on John's intelligence. It wa=
s
> > >NOT a response to his debating points. =A0It is in short, an "ad
> > >hominem" attack!
>
> > "Ad hominem" is an attack based on an a priori assumption or
> > statement. In this case John had exhibited his ignorance and then
> > asked a question which I answered based on the evidence before us all.
>
> > >Why do you insist over and over that I embarrass you and demonstrate
> > >your ignorance in public? =A0Did you ever think of taking an on-line
> > >correspondence course to get your diploma?
>
> > >It's better to keep silent and be suspected of being a fool than to
> > >open your mouth and remove all doubt!
>
> > >I'm sorry. This is just too easy. I'm outta here.
>
> > That's the way. Run away.
>
> > --
> > Peter Bowditch aa #2243
>
> Hey, all I can say is, I experimented with
> these 'zappers', and =A0immediately after starting to
> 'zap' these two MS patients, who I still work with,
> they both went into remission and are actually still
> *regaining* function.
> The one fellow had absolutely
> *no* movement in three out of four limbs and limited
> movement in the right hand. Immediately he regained
> most of the right hand and some in the other three.
> Today, I notice his left hand is still loosening up and
> regaining tone and flex.
> Coinkydink?
> Then there were the two HepCers that immediately
> stopped testing positive.
> Also coincidence?
>
> HepC once is 5%, so give me
> the odds of all four of these, all immediately following
> getting 'zapped' .
>
> Would it be............5% of 5%? Times
> what for the MS remissions? Those are less or more than 5%
> Wait, I'll Google it................well, they seem to say remissions
> occur with MS also at 5%, but the disease is still
> occurring underneath, and they're toast just as fast, so big deal,
> but anyway, that's a 5% X 5% X 5% X 5% chance- hey,
> I'm sure that's quite possible Peter, Peter, Pumpkin Eater.
>
> John- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Rife, orgones, energy medicine, etc.

Fortunately, we don't have to wait very long. The Large Hadron
Collider will find new physics in the electroweak sector that will
have
impact on low energy everyday scale and in all forms of life. After
data
were sorted out in years ahead and theoretical framework built
come 2012. We will enjoy the planet like never before...

Z.