|
#5
04-11-2008, 08:42 AM
| |||
| |||
 Re: BATES IS A FRAUD! On 11 Apr, 03:40, spammer <sereb...[at]yahoo.com> wrote: - quote - > On Apr 10, 4:11 am, Zetsu <absolutelyinvinci...[at]hotmail.com> wrote:
How? If I cry 'wolf', 'wolf' on one occasion, when there really is no> > Dear spammer, > > Dr. Bates is not a fraud. > > If he was, then how did he get his stuff published in the New York > > Medical Journal? Don't you think a journal of such high standard would > > want to maintain their reputation by thoroughly validating Dr. Bates' > > claims before publishing it? > His theories have proven invalid, anything after becomes a fraud. wolf, then that makes me a fraud on that occasion. If on a later occasion I cry 'WOLF, WOLF!' and there really is a wolf, then I am not a fraud. Basically I am saying, even if one theory has been proven invalid, you can't say EVERYTHING else was invalid. You have to investigate first. |
 04-11-2008, 08:42 AM
| |||
| |||
 Sponsored links |
|
#4
04-11-2008, 02:40 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: BATES IS A FRAUD! On Apr 10, 4:11*am, Zetsu <absolutelyinvinci...[at]hotmail.com> wrote: - quote - > Dear spammer,
His theories have proven invalid, anything after becomes a fraud.> Dr. Bates is not a fraud. > If he was, then how did he get his stuff published in the New York > Medical Journal? Don't you think a journal of such high standard would > want to maintain their reputation by thoroughly validating Dr. Bates' > claims before publishing it? - quote - > Do you think Dr. Bates was some kind of evil genius? That he could
Evil, no. I'll take my reality over yours any day.> fool the most intelligent, high class scientists of his time? That the > publishers of the journal would not check to verify each and every > single observation? I think you should get a reality check, man! |
|
#3
04-11-2008, 01:42 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: BATES IS NOT A FRAUD! Dear Zetsu, Subject: How a second-opinion develops. No, Dr. Bates was not a "fraud". He expresses the concept that the over-prescribed minus is dangerous, or has a serious "secondary" problem. Some of his concepts are correct -- like this one. Other concepts perhaps need further review and evaluation. But he was a very vocal critic of that minus -- and we can agree that OBJECTION to that minus is indeed the second-opinion. Enjoy, On Apr 10, 4:11*am, Zetsu <absolutelyinvinci...[at]hotmail.com> wrote: - quote - > Dear spammer, > Dr. Bates is not a fraud. > If he was, then how did he get his stuff published in the New York > Medical Journal? Don't you think a journal of such high standard would > want to maintain their reputation by thoroughly validating Dr. Bates' > claims before publishing it? > Do you think Dr. Bates was some kind of evil genius? That he could > fool the most intelligent, high class scientists of his time? That the > publishers of the journal would not check to verify each and every > single observation? I think you should get a reality check, man! |
|
#2
04-10-2008, 08:11 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: BATES IS NOT A FRAUD! Dear spammer, Dr. Bates is not a fraud. If he was, then how did he get his stuff published in the New York Medical Journal? Don't you think a journal of such high standard would want to maintain their reputation by thoroughly validating Dr. Bates' claims before publishing it? Do you think Dr. Bates was some kind of evil genius? That he could fool the most intelligent, high class scientists of his time? That the publishers of the journal would not check to verify each and every single observation? I think you should get a reality check, man! |
|
#1
04-10-2008, 03:11 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: You can't beat Bates for fraud On Apr 9, 6:29 pm, spammer <sereb...[at]yahoo.com> wrote: - quote - > Sad thing is you're old enough to know better.
One might wonder why Otis hasn't used all this wisdom and lore to ...um ... do anything about his six diopters of myopia. Hmmmm. Instead he leans toward prevention. Ask Mike Tyner about shark repellent. It's a far more compelling case than anything Otis ever put forward. |
|
04-10-2008, 01:29 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: You can't beat Bates for fraud Sad thing is you're old enough to know better. |
|
#-1
04-09-2008, 07:36 PM
| |||
| |||
| You can't beat Bates Subject: His opinion on the "cause" of myopia. http://www.i-see.org/early_bates/bates_myopia1912a.html As always, Enjoy, |
| Tags |
| bates, beat |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Forum | Replies | Last Post | |
| Nearsighted but can't see to read Mike S.: My doctor told me that I'm nearsighted and need glasses to see far away. Other than that, my eyes are fine/normal. However, I need my glasses to... | Vision | 10 | 01-10-2006 07:36 PM | |
| What can't this person get help for her eyes?! dallas1960: A friend of mine in Dallas has had serious problems with glare for the past year and no one she has gone to can help her. Even with sunglasses... | Vision | 5 | 01-22-2005 09:40 PM | |
| I can't believe.. Francine Eisner: I can't believe how awful everyone is being to eachother. And it's not just here, it's happening on the groups I moderate, and the other groups I... | Vision | 9 | 12-23-2003 08:59 PM | |
| I can't believe.. Francine Eisner: I can't believe how awful everyone is being to eachother. And it's not just here, it's happening on the groups I moderate, and the other groups I... | Main Category | 9 | 12-23-2003 08:59 PM | |
| Why can't I read my posts? Michael P Gabriel: My eyes are 20-20, yet my posts never show up. So how's come? | Lasik Eye Surgery | 4 | 10-21-2003 05:45 PM | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |
Linear Mode
