Hank wrote about me:
<<If there is anyone that is unable to allow for the possibility of being wrong, it is you. >>
In one of his first posts on the Zona board he wrote:
<<Vasomax stands NO chance of approval by the FDA >>
I challenge you to find one post where I said that there is no chance for Vasomax not to be approved. I have always acknowledged the risks of this stock. You are the one who has irresponsibly claimed absolute certainty.
Instead of answering the legitimate questions that I and others pose to you, you fall back on your anonymous persona of some kind of drug expert. You seem to think that an expert is someone who doesn't have to prove what he says. Wrong, Hank! If you want us to bow to your omniscience, than come forward and identify who you are, who you worked for and who you are "consulting" with. Let us know the detailed data on Viagra and Vasomax. The fact is you know nothing about either drug.
You have shown one shred of intelligence in your posts here:
<<You and your buddy MORON can make fun of my opinions and credentials all you want but it just makes you look pathetic.>>
You realize that your claims are tenuous, so you try to deter an examination of them by suggesting that anyone who dares to question your "credentials" is "pathetic." You base your entire credibility on your supposed expertise. Any reader has the right to be skeptical about you. You are certainly wrong about the following:
<<If you haven't noticed, other people from the pharmaceutical and medical field have posted here too and they don't think Vasomax will get approved either. >>
There have been diverse opinions from those claiming some sort of expertise. Most people realize that there is risk for both shorts and longs. You apparently don't see that.
Chances are that if you ever were in the drug business in some capacity, you were a failure. A consultant, as you claim to be, is usually someone who is out of work. If you were such a bright superstar, some company would be paying you big money to develop drugs.
But you like playing pretend, don't you? on March 20th, at 12:19 PM you posted the following:
<<But hey, I'd love to sit here and talk science with you all day but I have to go and help develop some real drugs for approval now. >>
There you go again, trying to fake your credibility. You know what you did the rest of the day? You posted at 12:30, 2:11, 3:00, 3:16, 3:56, 4:14, 4:19 and 4:43. When the hell do you have time to develop real drugs?? In case someone might think you are some kind of genius who only has to work a half day to be a great drug discoverer, you posted at the following times before 12:19: 8:44, 10:00, 11:51, 12:09 and 12:12. This was all on one work day and doesn't include the 6 posts you made that night! A cursory examination of your posting history reveals that the above pattern is the rule, not the exception.
Hank, the only thing you try to develop is your arrogant and egotistical online personality. Hank, the only thing pathetic is how stupidly you make yourself look foolish. The following was an attempt by you to mock Myron:
<<Well thank you Myron. I guess the past 10 years that I've spent working in pharmaceuticals wasn't put to waste. I'm sure you're both an expert in this area and a brilliant investor. >>
This is how you view yourself. You admitted to that on Wexler's raggy thread. You claimed to make twice as much trading as you do "consulting." If falsely accusing Myron of believing this is worth your mocking, what does it mean if you truly believe that about yourself? Since you're kind of slow, I'll tell you. It means you're hypocritical, it means you're delusional and it means you're a fraud. |
