In <360EF4D6.5C9B at postoffice.idirect.com> K C Cheng
<kccheng at postoffice.idirect.com> writes:
>> =
>>> : Why should I care what books you read?
>> =
>>> I listed them so you could attempt to provide convincing evidence
>> that your writings are more important.
>> =
>>> : Why should
>> : I care whether you believe me? I don't owe you knowledge!
>> =
>>> Another standard indication of the presence of crackpots -- they
>> alone have the knowledge and the rest of us should listen.
>> =
>>> : Why just =
>> : never read mine instead of nagging me with your prejudices?
>> =
>>> I must admit, I am prejudiced towards facts and knowledge. Too
>> bad you can't provide any.
>> =
>>> : Your mind is
>> : more than made up even before reading them.
>> =
>>> I didn't make up my mind until I looked at your web page and
>> tried to decipher it. I've often changed my mind after making
>> it up, but that requires strong reasons to do so.
>> =
>>> : So long. No more from me.
>> =
>>> Ta-ta.
>> =
>>> : Maybe you have all the time on earth to nag others. I only have
time =
>to
>> : invent.
>> =
>>> Yeah, sure.
>> =
>>> : The rest is trivia, not worthwhile responding to.
>> =
>Actually, if you truly want to know, my 20-p article on Mystery of
the
>mind was in 1986-7 accepted by Canada's Sci & Technology Dimensions.
=
>>Unfortunately, it went bankrupt before publishing my article.
Perhaps their financial judgment was equivalent to their
editorial judgment.
It now
>has been published
By another (intellectually) bankrupt journal? Or "privately"?
You name a library we could borrow it from; if no other
libraries acquired it, this raises questions. I notice you do
not give the normally expected citations--name of journal,
year of publication, etc. If it is in a book, this is not
impressive; any fool can be published in a book.
- - - - - - - - - - - - (snip) - - - - - - - - - -
>
>I hope this is the last time I have to talk to you. I am very busy.
=
> We all share that hope.
F. LeFever