Guest guest Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 > Andy Cutler provides an amazing service to all of us parents of > mercury-poisoned kids! Andy helps us with our questions and expects nothing in return. He > wants to help us! He really cares about helping our kids recover! Because > of Andy, my son is recovering, and our family is forever grateful for this. > Andy deserves nothing but our respect and thankfulness. It is very nice that Andy provides comments on this list, and it is REALLY REALLY nice that your son is recovering. Hurray! Attacking people is useless. This is not anything particular to anyone (Andy, , etc), it is my opinion generally. However, this does not mean that people should not question, discuss, and criticize Andy's ideas. They should do so. Someone posted something similar recently on Dr. McCandless' list " she deserves only thanks " --- I don't think this is reasonable, good, or helpful to anyone. When you say he deserves " nothing but " our respect and thankfulness, I think you mean his ideas should not be questioned. I really disagree with that, if that is what you mean. good wishes, Moria > Jukoski > > > > > > > > Andy, > Here's the definition of ad hominem " Ad hominem is from the Latin > meaning " to the man. " In a debate or discussion, it is the act of > attacking the person or oppenent rather than debating the issues. " > When you attack 's lack of understanding, rather than addressing > the scientific issues she raised, it is by definition an ad hominem > attack. > > This has happened over and over again, anyone who would look through > the archives can see this. It grates after a while. We appreciate > your perspective, but alas, we will never see a debate on the > science, just an attempt to personally diminish those who oppose you. > > Rather than take the time to write another response that attempts to > evade the issues, why not take up 's suggestions and show from > what specific base of information her conclusions are incorrect. Not > just the conclusion, but the means to the conclusion. That's what's > not been done yet. Instead you have attempted to discredit her, not > discredit the information that led to her conclusions. > Rose > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 > > Andy deserves nothing but our respect and thankfulness. I appreciate this wonderful sentiment! Thank you! Please note that > However, this does not mean that people should not question, > discuss, and criticize Andy's ideas. They should do so. I do not consider it an attack to do this. When done thoughtfully I actually appreciate it. Andy . .. . . . . . . . . . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 Yeah, I think it's a " worship the doc " site, considering the number of thought-provoking, non-attack messages of mine that were declined. Debi > Someone posted something similar recently on Dr. McCandless' > list " she deserves only thanks " --- I don't think this > is reasonable, good, or helpful to anyone. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 Clarifying my earlier message which apparently was unclear to some: it really is OK to disagree with me, question me, promote different viewpoints, etc. and even to have a protracted discussion or debate and end it not having come to agreeement. I don't want anyone to feel inhibited from questioning and disagreeing - that is the only way we are going to all learn more. I do sincerely appreciate the positive feelings some people have for me. I just wanted to make it clear that questioning, discussing and disagreeing didn't detract from those feelings or my enjoyment of them - on the contrary I do enjoy a good discussion that furthers clearer understanding. Andy . . . . .. . . . . . > > > Andy deserves nothing but our respect and thankfulness. > > I appreciate this wonderful sentiment! Thank you! > > Please note that > > > However, this does not mean that people should not question, > > discuss, and criticize Andy's ideas. They should do so. > > I do not consider it an attack to do this. When done thoughtfully I > actually appreciate it. > > Andy . .. . . . . . . . . . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 13, 2004 Report Share Posted November 13, 2004 > > Yeah, I think it's a " worship the doc " site, considering the number > of thought-provoking, non-attack messages of mine that were declined. > > Debi I always find it discouraging when my posts are stopped for any reason, so I can understand your unhappiness with that. Lest anyone misunderstand, let me say that I did NOT mean the site is a worship the Doc site, nor did I mean anything unflattering about Dr. McCandless. My point was that I don't agree when people say that " <person x> deserves nothing but total thanks " , and this is true regardless of who <person x> is (thus I used 2 examples). While I think that Andy and Dr. McCandless DO both deserve plenty of thanks, I also think it is good and helpful to critically discuss the usefulness, truthfulness, and evidence supporting their ideas, at least at times. I don't think this needs to be critical of anyone " as a person " or generally; and I do GREATLY prefer when discussion is about issues, and when discussion " moves forward " . good wishes, Moria > > > Someone posted something similar recently on Dr. McCandless' > > list " she deserves only thanks " --- I don't think this > > is reasonable, good, or helpful to anyone. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.