Re: A disappointing week
From: MU (munospam_at_fastmail.fm)
Date: 12/06/04
- Next message: wondering_at_worldnet.com: "Re: A disappointing week"
- Previous message: Happy Dog: "Re: Side effects: drugs called statins"
- In reply to: Roger Zoul: "Re: A disappointing week"
- Next in thread: Roger Zoul: "Re: A disappointing week"
- Reply: Roger Zoul: "Re: A disappointing week"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 15:34:44 -0500
>::: http://www.heartmdphd.com/twf/acius.pdf
>::
>:: This would be a PDF file and not a site. The same data was
>:: presented at the meeting described by the PDF file as has been
>:: described here and elsewhere:
On Mon, 6 Dec 2004 11:29:12 -0500, Roger Zoul wrote:
> I asked for data not descriptions of data. You said there was data on the
> site but now you're saying that the data has only be described.
This is exactly what I am talking about when you deal with folks who do not
have a research background yet want to argue about data. it's worthless and
a waste of time.
Zoul wants "data". Roger, data is nothing more than information and it can,
or cannot, be tied to research. If it is tied to research, you're out of
your league trying to interpolate it. What Andrew has provided is data in
the term of info. He, as I am, are well aware of whether it is research
oriented or not. He, not I, *can* investigate research, research
methodologies, citations and the like.
- Next message: wondering_at_worldnet.com: "Re: A disappointing week"
- Previous message: Happy Dog: "Re: Side effects: drugs called statins"
- In reply to: Roger Zoul: "Re: A disappointing week"
- Next in thread: Roger Zoul: "Re: A disappointing week"
- Reply: Roger Zoul: "Re: A disappointing week"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|