<How do you determine whats bad science and what isn't?>
You study it.
<On the contrary, I'm trying to get you to commnicate what it is you object to and what you don't.>
That's NOT true... you ran off without understanding what I said and found some little ditty about how digestion chops up DNA into component parts... AA's, THEN pretended you knew all about it.
<Again, I think someone who has said he thinks eastern mystics can bi-locate, start fires with Qi etc shouldn't be quick to use the word wacko.>
Again... misrepresenting what I said... I compared them to what Jesus miracles were. YOU are the one who geffaud and snorted about how rediculous OTHER traditions are while embracing your own version of the same thing.
<Well, now that you mention it, I'd say the science involved in the latter is more rigorous.>
Oh, it was "mentioned" long ago... and now we can (finally) wrap up the whole conversation... as we agree to completely disagree!
<That companies patent DNA segments isn't the issue. Its whether they are patenting something "naturally occuring".>
Ummm guy... they are the same thing. Get a clue and read something will you? Therefore we can repeat:
""FURTHER, if new viewers think I unduely harsh, Brummar knows NOTHING about the topic in general, as evidenced by his not knowing companies patent sequenced DNA segments, including genes as a normal part of business.""
DAK |
