K C Cheng kccheng at postoffice.idirect.com
Mon Jun 29 16:54:53 EST 1998

John H. Casada wrote:
> K C Cheng wrote:
> >
> > It's totally inadequate to have abstracts when the proof is vital.
> > Every sentence must be read, every diagram studied, to see what is
> > right, what is wrong.
> If you had some experience in science you would recognize that the
> purpose of the abstracts is to see if "every sentence" and "every
> diagram" is worth reading.  Give it a try.
> > As I said before, it's up  to others to seek, not for me to give,
> > knowledgee.
> > Since you don't feel it wothwhile to  get a copy, I doubt it's wortth
> > my 100 dollars to send you one.  When Einstein published his Theory of
> > Relativity,
> > surely it was not for him to explain first.  It was for others to buy
> > it.
> Again, if you had *any* experience with science you would know that
> Einstein's theories were published in reviewed journals first.  He
> didn't copyrite a book and say "for $100 I'll show you something really
> neat!"
> Try (just try) to show a little scientific courtesy and give information
> instead of empty commercials.
> > Everyone's thinking is "private."  Why should anyone's be "public?"
> Because you are making public claims????
> > >    In everyday language, "put up or shut up¡I
> > That goes for you too!  That kind of arrogance is like the Nazis to
> > the Jewish scientists in WW II.  Ha! What's so important about you?
> > Being an American?
> > >   However, I have
> > > >several volumes published for private and public viewing.  Before I
> > > can
> > > >have money to publish them all for a world wide evaluation,  I
> > > attempted
> > > >to have several issues put on the Web.  But,  now,  I have to buy a
> > > new
> > > >site  just to show them.
> I've seen your site.  Have you ever seen the Smurfs on t.v.??  Your site
> is really "Chengy!"  Maybe "Papa Cheng" can publish the "Chenerific"
> exploits of "Cheniography."  Be sure to get it reviewed.  There must be
> armies of "Chengs" who will give you impartial feedback.  One day, when
> you find enough suckers--"Che-cheng!!!"  You may be rolling in the
> dough!
> John
Re.  the above:
I repeat my apologies just posted a minute ago.   My inadequacies at
webpage making has caused this misunderstanding.  I thought I had given
out  my first 3.5, now 4 issues on the web.  Now you can see them FOR
SURE.  Any more problems with the site,  please e-Mail me.  NOW I  know
how to correct  these technical  problems.
kccheng ¾G«a¸s

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net