In bionet.neuroscience k p Collins <kpaulc@[----------]earthlink.net> wrote:
> Hi, Dag.
> I stand on what I've posted, Dag.
>> So, since the topic has become
> 'suggesting' to others what their
> 'shortcomings' are, I 'suggest' that
> you spend some 'time' working at
> extracting information-content
> from dynamic visual imagery.
>> Somewhere in that effort, you'll
> come to understand the position
> I've discussed :-]
I am used to lecture to medical students on this topic, trying to make
it comprehensible to normal brains. What you write is far out.
I also suggest you read Neil Fournier's (NMF) kind advice to you in another
posting very carefully. I agree with him on the main issue, athough I am
not confident that you are going to change your way of writing. But if
you took his advice, and changed your approach, it would be very good indeed..
I am also rather tired of having to scroll through all of the previous
discussion just because you do not care to clip off everything except
the very essentials to show what you are commenting. Those who want to
read the whole previous posting can go to the previous posting.