TC's intellectual integrity.

From: Laurie (no_at_spam.com)
Date: 03/23/05 

Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 11:45:22 -1000

"TC" <tunderbar@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1111611099.602574.180320@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>
> I am not pretending to be an authority on the physiological effects of
> alcohol, ...
    You said: "Now I am *sure* that a bit of alcohol in one form or another
can have some small positive effect on our physiology and I am *sure* that
wine may have some as well"
    Is there any particular reason you avoided the issue and can not support
your claims?? Isn't "sure" and "may have" rather contradictory??

> If you can't find it, that, my dear, is your problem.
    And, if you can not support your claims made in public, it is not only
your personal problem, my dear, but everyone's. What if people actually
believed your unsupportable claims?

> Frugivorous!!!! Bwah Ha ha ha ha.....
    Is this really the best scientifically-valid rebuttal you can think of?
All education is self-education; try some.
    Precisely the kind of idiotic, juvenile, evasive, non-response, rather
common to cultural-omnivores who are totally unfamiliar with their own
physiology.
http://www.ecologos.org/anatomy.htm
http://www.ecologos.org/omni.htm

    But, why don't you prove that humans are carnivores, as you imply, and
offer some scientifically-credible physiological/biochemical support??
Because you can not!
    Do you deny that you are a frugivorous, tropical ape??
    Is not YOUR DNA 98+% identical to chimps? Or, are you really not
human??

> I partake of [alcohol] often.
    While you are writing these nonsensical posts, no doubt. Sober up and
crack a biochem book<G>.

> The trick is in not overdoing it.
    Well, guess what, biochemistry occurs on a molecule-by-molecule basis,
so there is no lower, "safe" limit for toxins, as you state, or for toxic
pollutants, as the EPA fantasizes.

> too damned funny.... and idiotic... and *you* propose to lecture *us*.
    I am not 'lecturing' to anyone, I present well-support arguments and
data to those who sincerely ARE interested in human diet.
    You, clearly, are neither sincere (except in denigrating yourself with
juvenile personal insults) nor are you interested enough in human
physiology/biochemistry to learn enough to write a coherent, credible
article, nor can you present a logical critique or other concepts.

    Laurie