bruce raoul parnas (brp at neuron.arc.nasa.gov) wrote:
: In article <2n4qvr$s0u at emoryu1.cc.emory.edu>, bioaw124 at emoryu1.cc.emory.edu (Claire Maier) writes:
: |>
: |> Please post a _real_ abstract of your paper, if that is what you
: |> are claiming to be doing. It should be under 300 words. And given
: |> your love of historical non sequiturs, please do not make any
: |> direct references to anything before 1980.
: ^^^^^^^^^^^^
What's magical about 1980? A lot of great neurobiology was donw quite a bit
There's nothing magical about 1980. But since the original poster
in this thread was proclaiming the inadequacies of modern biology
and neuroscience in providing cures for neurological diseases, and
since he was giving us a tour of the history of science, beginning
in the 17th century and ending in the 1970's, it seemed
appropriate to request that he limit his discussion to recent
research for the purpose of letting the newsgroup know just what
he was talking about. (Also, since the poster gave no indication,
in 3 longwinded posts, that he actually knew anything about
research done after 1980, I wanted to call him on this issue.)
