Those who know all the answers

[Guest guest]

It was bound to happen. The two members who know all the answers

finally meet- and they don't agree. What fun!

Comdyne2002 starts off with a patronizing,sexist, ageist, ad hominem

attack upon E.E. Casimero's prime source

E.E. suggests C. should read his opus in entirety before commenting.

Self-appointed referee (me) awards first round to E.E. ad hominem

attacks are a no-no.

Future flurries may include, all fruit diet cures vs. sugar is to

cancer as gasoline is to fire.

Will subsequent rounds be more enlightening or more irritating and

toxic? Does either sage have any evidence? Are all old authors,

Tilden, St.,etc equally valid? Stay tuned.

Sound the bell,

Round Two.

Jon Beggs

-- In , " comdyne2002 " <comdyne@...> wrote:

>

> Thats nonsense. Its the old Hulda theory. A delightful old lady

> well-loved by many, but she is nutty as a fruitcake. Cancer is caused

> by irritation and toxicity. Flukes are one of many contributors but

> they are not the cause.

>

> " jrrjim " wrote:

> >

> > You say:

> > How to Cure Cancer

> > This is my step by step easy cure for ALL cancers....by Eli Edwin

Casimero

>

>

> > I say:

> > Gee -- I wonder why I have a problem with this idea and approach?

> >

> > All cancers are caused by liver flukes???

> >

>

[Guest guest]

We're not teen agers in a competition here.

Comdyne and I are just a couple of good samaritans trying to help people.

Oh I read intently all of Comdyne's posts because I know I can learn a lot

from him.

I don't like claiming to know all the answers, if I had that attitude, it

would be a hindrance to learning new things.

Good skill to all,

Edwin

Beggs wrote:

> It was bound to happen. The two members who know all the answers

> finally meet- and they don't agree. What fun!

> Comdyne2002 starts off with a patronizing,sexist, ageist, ad hominem

> attack upon E.E. Casimero's prime source E.E. suggests C. should read his opus

in entirety before commenting. Self-appointed referee (me) awards first round to

E.E. ad hominem attacks are a no-no.

> Future flurries may include, all fruit diet cures vs. sugar is to

> cancer as gasoline is to fire. Will subsequent rounds be more enlightening or

more irritating and toxic? Does either sage have any evidence? Are all old

authors, Tilden, St.,etc equally valid? Stay tuned. Sound the bell, Round

Two.

> Jon Beggs