Dag, please Forgive me for responding so 'strongly'. I'm dealing with
stuff, these days, that has nothing to do with you, but it
'spilled-over into my reply to your post.
ken [K. P. Collins]
"Schmitd! Schmitd! Ve vill build a Shapel!"
"KP-PC" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net%remove%> wrote in message
news:U%fva.149232$ja4.7018872 at bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
| Hi Dag.
|| "Dag Stenberg" <dag.stenberg at nospam.helsinki.fi.invalid> wrote in
| message news:b9j89d$nnl$1 at oravannahka.helsinki.fi...| | KP-PC <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net%remove%> wrote:
| | > [...]
| | [...]
|| [To ALL] Formal Challenge: Find =anything= that's discussed in AoK
| which was not already Proven in the Literature that existed when
| was written.
The Challenge stands, but I'll CLARIFY, here, that =of course= I had
to include References to, and discussion of, Work done by others in
order to Substantiate the New stuff that's in AoK [as is stated
clearly in AoK's Preface].
My Acknowledgement of the Work done by others was given =The=
Place-of-Honor in AoK's Preface - at it's [climactic] Conclusion:
"I thank those who have devoted their lives to uncovering the secrets
of the central nervous system. Your papers have been my 'colleagues'.
I hope that you will enjoy considering [Neuroscientific] Duality
Theory's synthesis of your findings."
I thought that was clearly-enough stated.
I still do :-]
K. P. Collins