kkollins at pop3.concentric.net wrote:
: G'd-aye Might, I've also had a Formal Challenge before the Neuroscience
: Community for more than 20 years. It's reiterated in the Preface of the
: "Automation of Knowing..." ms. (AoK).
Is this some kind of secret Formal Challenge. Kind of like the
"double secret probation" in Animal House (or was that "super
secret probation")?
Just what is this Formal Challenge?
: There've been several Tests", all handled Successfully "except" one in
: which a small "cross-roads" collection of neruons was brought up in the
: form of a paper that didn't bother to say anything... I didn't take up
: this "test" because I'dve had to respond by writing a Neuroanatomy text,
: which I'll Gladly do, but not while I've got to work two Jobs... and the
: particular set of cells in question will be, at most, a footnote.
: (everything's in the Fairly-Witnessed archives I've maintained).
I was wondering when that sentence was going to end.
Anyway, you refer to "several Tests" which were all handled successfully.
What are the tests? How are they handled successfully? Who made the
determination that they were handled successfully? Please provide
references.
What is a "cross-roads" collection of neurons? I looked in the index
for this term in several books on various aspects of neuroscience and
didn't see it in any of them. So I'm curious if this is a real term
or something designed to confuse the issues. If you're really an
expert in this, I'd think you'd know the terms and how to use them.
There are quite a few Neuroanatomy texts available. What do you
know that could result in an improvement over them? (Note that
this is question is asked for a factual answer rather than an
evasive answer.)
What are these "Fair Witnesses" you keep talking about? The only
place I've seen that term is in Heinlein's Stranger in a Strange
Land. Are you confusing that book with reality?
Are your archives available over the net? Why not put a web page
on one of the many free services available?
Anyway, you keep boasting about your knowledge. But
when asked to prove that you have such knowledge, you don't even
try. Why is this?
By the way, when you are going to answer the question on your
training in Physics? You claimed such training in a previous post
but appear to be very unwilling to answer questions about it.
If you're an expert in Physics, Mathematics, and Neuroscience, I
would expect one of two results:
1) you would never bring it up (but you already have)
2) you bring it up and work dilligently to prove it at every
step (you brought it up but don't answer specific questions).
Eric Johnson