Re: SHEC Labs Apology to Marc Dannenberg


"fkasner" <fkasner@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:q8WEe.177$aT1.5@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Marc wrote:
> > Most people are alarmists, and see things soley through their own eyes
> > with their pre determined opinions blocking out the truth. That is
> > most true of this useless group of "scientists" and "educated" folks.
> > I dread what the future holds if you people are the minds of science.
> > You can all kiss my big hairy ass. By the way if the jerkoff who
> > slandered me comes forward and grows a ***, I will have you arrested
> > before you can say Great White North.
> >
> > Mr. Dannenberg,
> >
> >
>
> If you had any education worth anthing at all you would be familiar with
> a concept of reversal in historical criticism. As such when we apply
> the denigration you employ to others and your implication of wisdom to
> yourself to reversal of object your come across looking remarkably
> foolish at the very best. Your total disregard of sound scientific
> principle shows you to be a total yahoo.
> FK

That's beyond Marcs' grasp. My very first reply to him was in the tone, or
manner, in which he was addressing this newsgroup....instead of taking the
hint and toning it down a notch or two, he just went into "meltdown mode".

He resides in my killfile, so except where someone quotes his text, I don't
see anything he writes, but I gather that although he insists he hasn't been
fired by SHEC, he's badmouthing them again. "Net Kook" status confirmed.

And I gather he's sooooo off his rocker, he believes, from Spain, he will
have me "arrested", in Canada, for alleged "slander"
ROFL! This from the guy who started a thread "K. Jones is a cheap ***"
*LOL*!

Interesting, that just before coming in here claiming that SHEC was the
greatest thing since sliced bread, he had this to say on an "energy" site:

>-- Marc Dannenberg, June 6, 2005
>They don't mention where they are getting the monies from, who they are
getting the monies from, when the power plant is going to be started, and
since I know >there are just 2 people involved in SHEC Labs, how they are
going to attain manpower to get such a project going. They also don't
mention that the process is >inefficient right now and they are valuing
their company at 60 million dollars without having dime one in the door over
the last 9 years in revenue. Anyone can write >anything claiming to do
anything. I would love to see this work, but without more concrete evidence
and big investors, it's just a pipe dream.
>
>-- Marc Dannenberg, June 6, 2005
>I like the line,"for the doubters". Who can doubt when there is absolutely
no specific information about the project. This is like writing an article
based on the >coming of the end of the world. We know it's coming, we don't
know when or how it will be played out. Here is a little inside info, the
Peer Revue came from a >gentleman who is working with SHEC Labs for a long
time. He is not exactly objective in my opinion. This has the feeling of
"hot air".
>
>-- Giulio Negrini, June 6, 2005
>This project is at R&D stage all projects at this stage are difficult to
analyse the economic projections.
>
>-- Marc Dannenberg, June 7, 2005
>Exactly my point, Giulio. 60 mil is a lot of gash for a company that has
had nothing but R and D for 9 years. The article also states SHEC's process
is inefficient. I >know the insiders of the co. and I know they do not have
the wherewithall to follow this through.

Then he goes into "meltdown" when posters in this forum question the value
of SHEC's process? LOL!

K. Jones



.