Neuron-glia interaction [the 'style' of AoK]

kenneth Collins kpaulc at earthlink.net
Thu Jan 13 17:13:07 EST 2000


kenneth Collins wrote:

>[...]

> AoK is written in a tightly-integrated way that doesn't waste words.
> it's also written in a hierarchical-'level' way, that Honors folks'
> efforts if they Choose to read and study the paper multiple times, and,
> of course, read the refs that are cited in AoK.
> 
> there are =dozens= of such 'levels'. with every reading, if the Reader
> Studies while one reads, with each rereading, the stuff of the next
> hierarchical-'level' 'pops-out'.

there's no 'mystery', and =nothing= 'untoward', in the way AoK was
written. it's 'style' was the Considered result of my prior interactions
with folks who uniformly advised me to 'be concise' and to 'keep it
short'.

that's why the 'body' of AoK (the 'Short Paper') is only 6 pages long,
with the rest being in 'appendices', as a Courtesy to folks who want to
look, further, into the stuff that's discussed in the 'Short Paper'.

but, of course, AoK deals with the entirety of Neuroscience as it
existed as of the 'time' that AoK was written.

> i'll gladly demonstrate in-person, although it takes weeks to work,
> briefly, through all the 'levels' that're in AoK's 114 pages, which
> briefly introduce NDT.

>[...]

further note: the stuff of my nickel & dime 'investment' is now a
'raging' flood that's 'carried me away'.

it's as Sad as it is 'hilarious'.

it's Obvious (i can Demonstrate) that 'folks' who saw, early-on, what
was in the work, have been working to 'rewrite History' with respect to
the work.

and all the while, the work has been withheld from those on whose
behalves it was done.

Galileo redux, but with roles 'shifted'.

it's the worst-possible outcome. rather than 'just' Doing Science, i'm
confronted with the results of this Reprehensibly-Dishonest
'retrofitting' of the History of Science.

it's 'hilarious'.

i can't comment upon the stuff of my nickel & dime 'investment' without,
simultaneously, exposing Truth re. all that's transpired.

it was the same way a decade ago when i stopped reading in the
Neuroscience stacks.

it's not the Researchers.

it's 'folks' who've been 'steering' the attention of Researchers, and,
simultaneously, 'exposing' the Researchers to stuff with respect to
which, for the most part, they remain Innocent.

it's the single most-egregious act of deliberate Predation that's
occurred within the entire History of Science.

so, i =ask=, once again, that Researchers who Value Honor in Science
meet with me in-person.

K. P. Collins




More information about the Neur-sci mailing list