Frank, i stand on what i posted... i'll explain, a bit further, below.
flefever wrote in message <7n8nfs$lm4 at dfw-ixnews6.ix.netcom.com>...
>In <e$#bc$$0#GA.150 at cpmsnbbsa02> "Ken Collins" <KPaulC at email.msn.com>
>writes:
>>>>to anyone who cares...
>>>>if you read AoK, Ap5, you'll see that, although i do integrate septal
>and
>>subicular fx, which incorporate neural activation that travels via the
>>fornix, i did not integrate the fornix... when i read for AoK, i could
>find
>>no evidence of "memory" deficits correlated with fornix section... so
>>>However, whether you really did read it in"AoK" or did a quick internet
>check, you did so AFTER pontificating on the cyst's affect on the
>fornix, irresponsibly, in your haste to convey the impression that you
>were an expert on such things...
actually, what i was doing was, as usual, to draw folks' attentions to AoK's
synthesis. the fornix is in-there in the discussion of the septal 'ramp
architecture' as it enters into orientation with respect to external sources
of TD E/I(up), and which acts via the fornix... and it's as i've said... in
all the 'time' up to the writing of AoK, i found no evidence that fornix
section results in memory deficits... this remains my position until i can
get more info re. the particular stuff that was referred to in the _NYT_
report.
something like what you accuse me of is True, however. when i read the _NYT_
report, when it appeared in the _NYT_ a few weeks back, i just dismissed it.
then i was referred to it, again, by Mr. Blue's post, this time via a Dallas
newspaper, i presumed that the persistence of the report begged comment, and
that it's content was verified at its face value. then, i wrote my initial
response without going back to AoK (which i've not reread for at least a
decade [all my comments have been from memory]). then, i got out a copy of
AoK, checked the Index, and on not finding the fornix explicitly-referenced,
recalled my former negative search results. it was then that i posted the
CORRECTION.
as i said, the fornix is integrated within AoK, but not with respect to
memory deficts.
if you want to know why i 'don't bother' to explain things in more-detail,
it's because =no one= has ever acknowledged even the most-fundamental stuff
that's discussed in AoK... the functionality of the great decussations. if
folks don't grasp that straight-forward stuff, i can go on and on, at
more-detailed 'levels', and most of what i'd say would zip right past folks.
that, and that i don't believe 'no one understands', and what does one do in
the face of such?
>>- - -0 - - (snip) - - - - - - - - - - -
>>>>i responded in my preceding post, including the fornix, because of
>what was
>>reported in the _New York Times_ article..
>>>Now you blame the NY Times for your mistakes?
it remains to be seen whether the _NYT_ report was accurate, and if it was
accurate, whether the stuff communicated to folks at the _NYT_ was accurate.
i =assumed= both.
clearly, the assumption was =solely= my Error.
clearly, i corrected my Error as soon as it became clear to me.
>>> but i'm left wondering if this
>>more-recent thing is "just" another instance that's similar to the
>>totally-erroneous "discussion" of hippocampal theata, and other,
>rythms,
>>that was on the board a while back.
>>Well, having been the one who initiated the discussion of "theata"
>(theta) "rythms" (rhythms), I will try to clarify the mystery for you:
>yes, you are "in the right ball park" inasmuch as theta rhythms DO have
>something to do with the hippocampus, and probably with memory;
>however, I was asking if anyone had information (or even
>as-yet-untested ideas) about the cellular mechanisms underlying
>NON-hippocampal theta... My recollection is that the discussion was
>not TOTALLY "erroneous", unless you mean simply that the discussion was
>conducted entirely without reference to "AoK"
the 'discussion' was =total= B. S. ...i've still got it in it's entirety.
this same sort of B. S. 'testing' follows me where ever i 'go' online,
regardless of the nature of this or that NG in which i'm participating. in
addition to this, there's B. S. being dumped on all of the work i've done,
whether or not, i'm participating in this or that NG... i routinely 'go'
into NGs 'at random', and find such dumping of B. S. going on rampantly...
i've made a Study of such.
BTW, there was a report in today's (Sat, 24Jul99) _New York Times_, "Looking
for Happiness? It May Be Very Near", by P. Belluck, pA17, that substantiates
the stuff of AoK, Ap7 (mechanism of 'volition', etc.), and goes a bit
further by delineating between right and left prefrontal cortex, which i did
not do when writing AoK. (the CAT scan included with the article is
incorrectly captioned, though. instead of "left frontal lobe", it's more
like 'left temporal pole", or 'left ventral insular cortex'... and there's
other stuff reported in the article that's incorrect. [i've a standing offer
to review any Journalist's efforts to report on Neuroscience matters,
pre-publication, gratis, and anonymously... never been taken up on such.])
>>- - - - - (snip) - - - - - - - --
>>>it has seemed that nothing i do makes any difference
>>You've got THAT right!
you miss the gist of what i posted, entirely. the gist of it is that, if one
takes a Stand on behalf of Truth, and folks like you do stuff like you've
done, what is there that 'remains for one to do'?
Truth is the 'Bottom Line', Frank. if folks have no respect for Truth, it's
clear to me that anything with respect to my being is insignificant,
relative to folks' 'moving away from' Truth.
>>>> i don't bother
>>much, these days, to check before i comment.
>>That's not news to us.
you keep saying such. you keep addressing my 'stupid errors', but, although
i've repeatedly asked you to do so, you've yet to point to any of what you
refer to as my 'stupid errors'.
i ask you, once again, to do so.
>>>>>>>i wish someone could understand how reprehensible it is to me that
>folks've
>>posted, and published, erroneous stuff "just" to "test" my
>understanding. if
>>this is yet another instance of the same, then the _New York Times_
>can
>>piss-off real fast.
>>>Good thing you qualified this, saying "IF this is yet another
>instance", otherwise people might think youu had some delusional system
>in which the NY Times took some notice of you--indeed, even went so far
>as to print erroneous information just to "test" you and expose you to
>possible (likely) public humiliation!
>>>- - - - -(snip) - - - - - - - -
>>> no
>>one understands, or cares, that, for me, it's a life-and-death
>struggle that
>>i willingly took up on folks' behalves...
>>Ummm...which folks were those? Any of you folks recall asking Ken to
>do this on their "behalves"? (Forgotten already? Cyst got your fornix?
>cat got your tongue?)
Frank, if you're blind to what's in what i've said, the blindness is
yours... do you not read the News?
>>>yet, my income is interfered with,
>>TRANSLATION: not able to hold a job?
i stand on what i posted.
>>>my loved ones are harrassed,
>>I think I remember this: someone sent a letter tro you at your father's
>address, after you moved out?
i stand on what i've posted.
>>> i'm routinely "poked" and "probed" as if i'm
>>some kind of sub-human "thing",
>>Alian abduction? or is this just a figure of speech?
i stand on what i've posted.
>>>> i can't pass-gas without affecting the
>>"stock market"...
>>I REMEMBER your saying something about the Stock Market being somehow
>influenced by your activities; never knew until now just what the
>mechanism was.
:-)
>>- - - - - - - -(snip) - - - - - - - - - -
>>>>...and, yes, i was well-aware of the Norwegian-sounding names on the
>board
>>recently.
>>Omigod! Are the Norwegians in on this conspiracy? Or is it only that
>their names SOUND Norwegian, just to divert suspicion to Norway? The
>answer is VERY important to me, because I was IN Norway (Bergen) just
>two years ago! And I often listen to Garrison Keillor---indeed, I have
>even met him, and an old college friend of mine was his teacher! SAY
>IT ISN'T SO!!! (If it IS just a red herring, then where are we? I saw
>MANY herrings in Bergen; none red, that I recall, but their true
>appearance could have been disguised.)
>>>>>
i stand on what i posted.
K. P. Collins
