Comments on: Expanded name http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/expanded-name.htm Examining scientific and political claims (eg HIV=AIDS) and dissent in the light of the scientific literature Wed, 07 Jan 2009 22:10:14 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: Truthseeker http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/expanded-name.htm#comment-4830 Truthseeker Mon, 16 Jul 2007 04:18:36 +0000 http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/expanded-name.htm#comment-4830 You did not recognize the blog as the subject of the sentence, and "defending" as the verb, McK? Perhaps a moment's inattention between glasses of the rich bounty of the Scots talent for preparing distilled liquors of the celestial kind? "New" may be added at some later stage, just as "Ethical" may be removed once again, if such Comments as your'n can be deciphered and prove to go against it, rather than for it, which is as yet unknown since our Enigma machine is currently balking. The exact meaning and relevance of the remainder of Comment 1 and also Comment 3 also remain to be elucidated therefore, unless you can kindly rephrase them with English sentences of the kind that we were used to in the nursery, many thanks, sorry to be a bother. You did not recognize the blog as the subject of the sentence, and “defending” as the verb, McK? Perhaps a moment’s inattention between glasses of the rich bounty of the Scots talent for preparing distilled liquors of the celestial kind?

“New” may be added at some later stage, just as “Ethical” may be removed once again, if such Comments as your’n can be deciphered and prove to go against it, rather than for it, which is as yet unknown since our Enigma machine is currently balking. The exact meaning and relevance of the remainder of Comment 1 and also Comment 3 also remain to be elucidated therefore, unless you can kindly rephrase them with English sentences of the kind that we were used to in the nursery, many thanks, sorry to be a bother.

]]> By: McKiernan http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/expanded-name.htm#comment-4829 McKiernan Mon, 16 Jul 2007 03:47:15 +0000 http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/expanded-name.htm#comment-4829 Oh, Dear, Now I lay me down with sheep, I pray to cod my sole to keep, If I shud die afore I wake, Please, don't make me cod-fish cake. Oh, Dear,

Now I lay me down with sheep,

I pray to cod my sole to keep,

If I shud die afore I wake,

Please, don’t make me cod-fish cake.

]]> By: McKiernan http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/expanded-name.htm#comment-4828 McKiernan Mon, 16 Jul 2007 00:19:13 +0000 http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/expanded-name.htm#comment-4828 By the way, I love your adjectival phrase, "Defending science ... flowing through modern systems" It will go a long way with no sentence, no period and no verbs McK By the way, I love your adjectival phrase, “Defending science … flowing through modern systems”

It will go a long way with no sentence, no period and no verbs

McK

]]> By: McKiernan http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/expanded-name.htm#comment-4827 McKiernan Mon, 16 Jul 2007 00:03:01 +0000 http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/expanded-name.htm#comment-4827 Thank you, TS, The new name is certainly acceptable, although a prior plea some many comments back lobbied for the word 'new' in the title. Not to worry. It would appear that you've finally recognized the HIV∫AIDS puppy was a one-trick dog all this time. Even anonymous in the Moore bombs thread asks the pertinent question which has long been hammered to smithereens, internet-wise. Hopefully, TS, never again will it be necessary to fall back on first -∫- principle stated on page 61, of the somewhat incomplete, Onco∫ book---paraphrased slightly as---well they're all wrong because well, we said so, or something like that. Good luck on the new adventure. McK Thank you, TS,

The new name is certainly acceptable, although a prior plea some many comments back lobbied for the word ‘new’ in the title. Not to worry.

It would appear that you’ve finally recognized the HIV∫AIDS puppy was a one-trick dog all this time.
Even anonymous in the Moore bombs thread asks the pertinent question which has long been hammered to smithereens, internet-wise.

Hopefully, TS, never again will it be necessary to fall back on first -∫- principle stated on page 61, of the somewhat incomplete, Onco∫ book—paraphrased slightly as—well they’re all wrong because well, we said so, or something like that.

Good luck on the new adventure.

McK

]]>