A challenge for Ken...Re: AoK...Re: Science in the News

kenneth Collins kpaulc at earthlink.net
Fri Jan 28 08:30:53 EST 2000


i worked through the night, and went to Mass this morning. i wept while saying the Lord's Prayer
with the congregation.

it hurts so much to witness the Fact that it is myself who Knows the Least of all re. Jesus, His
Sacrifice, and all He Stood for.

i cannot go further, this day, without, first, Apologizing to you, Austin, and asking your
Forgiveness.

i've promising 'tracks' with respect to both ALS & Huntington's. with the former, there's hope
that it will make a difference. with the latter, it's too early to say. clearly, i've got to go
into the Genetics, but i've little hope of achieving success in providing anything, beyond
description, that can be usefully applied. perhaps the description of the 'big-picture'
integration, re. Huntington's will stim some thoughts of experts in Genetics?

anyway, the refs i've on-hand are good, but a bit too-general, so i'll go to the Library. i need
to get up-to-speed with respect to histology and case histories, and check my approaches against
up-to-date refs.

i'll post, next, over the weekend.

again, i am Wrong in my 'treatment' of you, and i Apologize. i'm not saying that you are
Justified. i'm saying that i am Wrong in my 'treatment' of you. i allowed the "Beast", Abstract
Ignorance, to Dictate my Being in our interaction, and i ab-used the understanding that i'm trying
to present as a Gift to the Children.

i could not have Failed in any larger way.

it's 'difficult'. all i've left to 'care' about is being able to work, and i'm up-against being
unable to even feed and shelter myself, let-alone, do the work.

and i loosed my 'outrage' upon you.

i am Wrong.

K. P. Collins

kenneth Collins wrote:

> except for posting the diagrams, i did everything you cite (quoted below) in 1975-6.
>
> if you've been monitoring the discussions, and if you've the understanding you claim, you must
> know that i've also done everything you cite (quoted below), except post the diagrams, right
> here in B.N, along with repeatedly offering to present everything in-person.
>
> but, after posting my prior reply to you, i realized that, although, in accord with
> 'traditional stadards, it was 'appropriate' for me to do so, i gave your 'challenge' short
> shrift.
>
> it's 'late in the game'. as i've previously stated, my contract with my ISP is drawing to a
> close. i've, therefore, only a little 'time' left. besides this, because it's been so cold
> here in New England, i've had to use more heating fuel than i'd expected, that's impacted my
> expenses, so i'd decided that i had to 'quit' smoking, which always transforms me into a
> 'grizzly bear' for at least the first week.
>
> then you come and post a msg that's totally 'ignorant' of the pre-NDT and 'post'-NDT 'states'
> of Neuroscience, and then 'challenge' me to state that which entire research programs in ALS
> and Huntington's have not yet accomplished.
>
> all of this is flat-out absurd, and it 'hurts-likehell' that you've 'imposed' such upon me.
>
> but while out to purchase the day's news, i called myself to task. i know that if i have a
> look at refs discussing ALS and Huntington's, i will be able to contribute stuff that will
> advance the understanding with respect to both diseases, so i decided that i must do so,
> bought a pack of cigarettes, and will spend the evening looking through the refs i've got on
> hand for clues that i can work with.
>
> for the record, the problem i've worked on is all aspects of the functioning of ='normal'=,
> organicically-intact nervous systems. of course,  i've studied lesion experiments. but i've
> never studied disease processes because, since there are long-standing research efforts
> devoted to the study of such disease processes, studying them didn't fit into my strategy of
> 'looking-elsewhere'.
>
> for the record, the 45 minutes i spent looking into Alzheimers, the other night, is the only
> 'time' i've spent doing so. other than that, i've caught some TV reports, and, as i discussed,
> have gained some insights into good approaches to generalized aging through my efforts to
> nurture my Father's well-being. (my Father is as lucid and as active as a 50 year old man, and
> i work to 'goose' him as much as i can so that he'll have reason to maintain his interest in
> Life.)
>
> for the record, all i know about ALS is that i wept when viewing Lou Gherig's 'good-bye' at
> Yankee Stadium, and that Stephen Hawking also suffers the disease. while i was reading re
> Alzheimers the other night, i learned that ALS impacts peripheral nerve myelination. that's
> all i presently know re. ALS.
>
> for the record, i know nothing re. Huntington's except that it involves choreoform movement
> 'abnormalities'. in the long-former past, i saw a possible 'correlation' to the sub-thalamic
> basal ganglia deficits that underpin hemi-ballism. whether or not this possible 'correlation'
> is actually anything is something i've never pursued. that is all i know about Huntington's.
>
> Austin P. So (Hae-Jin) wrote:
>
> > Manipulate you to my own ends? Please...you do flatter yourself unnecessarily don't you?
>
> if you're at a 'biotech' lab, if i give you 'critical' factors re. ALS & Huntington's, you and
> your lab stand to gain.
>
> i presume that you are here 'being a Jackass' with the express purpose of 'weasling' with
> respect to such 'profit'-seeking stuff.
>
> after all, you've shown up in an extremely-'time'-correlated way with respect to my having
> just done the exactly-correlated thing with respect to Alzheimer's.
>
> and, in light of the fact that everything i've done has been done in a self-funded way, and in
> light of the fact that you've 'come-on' in a way calculated to superficially-'trash' the
> fruits of my having given of myself for 29+ years, your intent is Obvious.
>
> but, in the end, i realized that if i can advance knowledge re. ALS & Huntington's, then i've
> Obligation, with respect to such, that transcends your 'profit'-seeking.
>
> i expect i can, so I've the Obligation to do so, and will, at least, explore a bit in the refs
> i've at hand.
>
> > If you are so confident about the validity of your AoK, then even a small application will
> > suffice.
>
> _AoK_ is just a brief introduction to Neuroscientific Duality Theory. it only casually
> addresses Tapered Harmony. NDT & TH are huge.
>
> K. P. Collins
>
> > Why don't you even try to graphically represent the topology of neuron-glia
> > interactions with respect to synaptic signalling. Since you have already "solved" the
> > problem "exactly" through AoK, and since you apparently have an equation that shows the
> > dynamics of this system, and since the data is out there already, this would be just a
> > simple exercise in math, no?
> >
> > If you have an equation of state, you should be able to draw out a phase diagram
> > representing the "topology" you so readily claim to have worked out.
> >
> > Humour me.
> >
> > kenneth Collins wrote:
> >
> > > Prediction: you are just another Jackass who thinks he can 'manipulate' me to his ends.
> > >
> > > Prediction: sooner or later, you'll 'go away' without having any success.
> >
> > --
> > ---
> > Austin P. So (Hae Jin)
> >
> > I.I.S.G.P.
> > Biotechnology Laboratory
> > University of British Columbia
> >
> > E-mail: haejin at netinfo.ubc.ca
> >
> > http://www.interchange.ubc.ca/haejin/index.html (under construction)







More information about the Neur-sci mailing list