Re: JUDYTH: National Science Foundation scholar****p and grants

On Jun 2, 12:02=A0am, "Martin Shackelford" <msha...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
> Posting here directly isn't an option for her at present, Barb. I've
said
> that
> before, but there are some things you pay no attention to, then make
> blithe statements which suggest exactly that.



   I thought you were in daily email contact with her.



>
> Martin
>
> "Barb Junkkarinen" <barbREMOVE...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
> news:org4445n6h3koduf727dlect40u13n0sid@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
> > On 1 Jun 2008 02:17:59 -0400, jfk2...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
>
> >>On May 30, 10:35 am, "I'm hittin that sonic dro."
> >><paul...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >>> On May 14, 10:58 pm, jfk2...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
>
> >>> > On May 12, 6:48 pm, howardp <ho...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> >>> > > On May 3, 1:50?am, "Michael O'Dell" <ml...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> >>> > > > Since Barb didn't point this out, I will.
>
> >>> > > > Barb wrote: "...and amongst the scientific jargon, it notes
> >>> > > > that..."
>
> >>> > > > To which Howard responded: "------You didn't understand the
> >>> > > > "scientific
> >>> > > > jargon"? Was it too complicated for you, who have billed
yoursel=
f
> >>> > > > in the
> >>> > > > past as a whiz adult on things medical?"
>
> >>> > > > Using the term "scientific jargon" as she did, in no way
implies=

> >>> > > > an
> >>> > > > inability to understand the jargon. ?It only implies the
jargon
> >>> > > > isn't
> >>> > > > relevant to her point, so she didn't bother to go into it.
>
> >>> > > > This is a pretty pathetic way to attack someone.
>
> >>> > > > Michael
>
> >>> > > Michael -
>
> >>> > > Pathetic? Jargon is a word often used to disparage. I have no
idea=

> >>> > > what
> >>> > > Barb intended by it, but if she understands the abstract, much
les=
s
> >>> > > its
> >>> > > TITLE, she is shy about affirming this. I am merely pointing out
> >>> > > what
> >>> > > seems obvious in her short remark on the paper abstract: she has
n=
o
> >>> > > idea
> >>> > > what the paper is about. BTW, do you?
>
> >>> > Maybe the only reason she had for posting the info on the paper
was =
so
> >>> > that she could twist it somehow to try to make it work as dirt.-
Hid=
e
> >>> > quoted text -
>
> >>> > - Show quoted text -
>
> >>> Barb is on a one-woman mission, as in a way Judyth is -- and the
> >>> fevered temperament it takes to do this every single day doesn't
leave=

> >>> much room for reflection. Just as Judyth is loose with details and
> >>> implications, so is Barb. Barb thought she won a terrific victory by
> >>> "proving" there was no "Indiana Biological Association" (Judyth
still
> >>> insists there was), but when she discovered the paper was presented
at=

> >>> the Indiana Academy of Sciences, THAT was "paydirt": =A0Judyth MADE
UP=

> >>> THE WHOLE THING.
>
> >>> Well, uh, no, come to think of it, I guess not. BARB FOUND THE
DARNED
> >>> ABSTRACT for the paper that should not exist if her own account of
> >>> Roswell Park is to be believed.
>
> >>> This is symptomatic of one thing and one thing only: an allergy to
the=

> >>> truth...no matter how much she herself has done to confirm the heart
> >>> of it!
>
> >>> This is why I spend little on McA's group.
>
> >>> Now I hear Reitzes is posting private e-mails from me. Frankly, I
> >>> probably won't even look at them. I doubt there is anything in them
> >>> that I could be embarrassed by. And if there is, I admit my
mistakes.
>
> >>> Last week he tried to dirty me by putting up a 10-year-old post and
> >>> trying to link me to UFO "buffs." This is his idea of rational
debate.=

> >>> This is the kind of person he is. This is how he chooses to live his
> >>> life. I don't get it.
>
> >>> H
>
> >>Anything goes, when it comes to trying to discredit not just Judyth
> >>but anyone who wants her to speak in an open forum.
>
> > She could post here openly. Heck, she even gets her words here by
> > proxy.
>
> >> How ironic for
> >>Barb, though, that she seems unable to take credit for pinning down
> >>the melanogenesis paper because doing so would spoil the debunking
> >>agenda. =A0Quite a catch-22.
>
> > I would never take credit for something I did not do. I did not find
> > any paper. No one had ever seen hide nor hair of any paper. I did find
> > the abstract ...and posted about finding it =A0and where it was
> > presented, so obviously I am credited for finding it. Duh. Judyth even
> > thanked me. :-)
>
> > Do try to keep up. And think.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -