Okay. I'll nibble a bit more, but I am amazed at the quantity of points you're willing to throw at a small point. For the record, in this instance, 'my dictionary' was
formatting link
However, if I go to my hard copy Websters Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, copyright 1988, pg. 243, 'ci-ta-tion 2 a: an act of quoting, b: excerpt, quote.' Good enough for me. Your argument attempts to draw the observers attention to the minutiae so that you don't have to deal with the facts. If you are to impress me, then try to at least do a bit of spell checking. My spell checkers just about crapped it's pants on this post alone.
The rest of your argument is more than I want to get into. It was your nit picking that made me rise to your bait. You enjoy to much listening to yourself, so I leave you to your pleasure.
Well shister, were you happy with the answer? It what way does it fall short of your expectations? What else may I explain to that pea size brain of yours, hmmmm?
Thanks for the clarification, Gunner. I wasn't sure about several things, so I tossed out a baited line.
Now I understand where you are coming from. I know your kind. Have dealings with your kind regularly.
I'm the guy who has to deal with you regularly, as my wife and I manage and live in a group home providing supports and advocacy for people with severe to profound MR and varying degrees of physical disabilities, ranging from minor to severe. I speak and do battle for those who are unable, and/or unwilling to speak for themselves, at the most basic level. Bad habit mine, being brusque to the point of rudeness, often laced with sarcasm, born of years of peoples' insensitivity to others position or disability or any number of things of which you would be aware.
I appreciate those, like you, who get shit done. I keep several of you in my pockets for the dealings such as you deal. I am not a popular person with many Drs, many techs and nurses and administrative people at the local medical-industrial-compound. Also not popular with a fair number of people from the state department that provides funding and regulations for our agency. But we are respected for the advocacy and care we provide.
In fact, come to think of it, I ain't very popular with the mainstream and status quo crowd period. Good.
I have found that most people are "afflicted" in one manner or another, and yes, I have my issues, but seldom feel dissed or offended by anything someone says about me. What I find irritating is when people start trotting out the "adjust your meds" putdown, or any number of demeaning and insensitive insults that may offend others. It demonstrates a lack of respect and an arrogance that may offend any number of people. So I shoot off my mouth and will continue to do so, both online and IRL.
I am not sure if I detect humor or yet another bit of condescension.
As far as defending Billy, and Bill, he/they are capable of that themselves and need not my defense. What I will do is stand shoulder to shoulder with them and throw rock.
Reference to KaiserPermante, typifying the medical-industrial-complex and uncaring allopaths, bureaucrats, politicos and businessfolk, in general, and a whole host of issues not worth going into.
mein Fuehrer???........what kind of cheap shot is that.....I guess you worked in the reference, eh? You are welcome for the bait provided, allowing you to do so.
I have no problem with self-medication, alternative therapy, whatever, for myself, but don't recommend, or cause others do the same, unless they are willing to take responsibility for such, and do their own research. Make of that what you will.
Self-medication carries it's own dangers when dealing with MH, and physical, issues; one must weigh the risk/benefit, and be willing to accept the consequences of doing so. I do.
I might add that one also exercise extreme caution concerning the allopathic craft.
Charlie, tired of talking shop and going to the garden for some therapy, getting some real dirt on my hands
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,But since we do not know what dictionary you used, as my old instructor
My point exactly Mr. Wilson, a citation is a quote, not a reference. You cite facts, events, etc, in a writing but If you are quoting a paper or a book, you don't need to be writing , you are plagiarizing,
Good enough for me. Your argument attempts to draw the observers
ahh this was a bit confusing at first, MS OS yes? yea it doesn't like colloquialism or street slang. I'm not changing except when I am writing for a professinal audience but if that is all ya got I am good with that, Mr. Wilson!
Suffice it to say, you ain"t got nothing of substance? Good. I have always found when you put your nose into a fight that wasn't yours, regardless of intentions, you have a good chance of getting it smacked.
Finally! Thank you, Billy,that was not hard was it? now I know who to look up and find his bona fides and what actual research he bases his thesis on. I can finally verify this bold comment. So I will check to see if this statement is based on actual research or just opinion.
What else can you do for this peabrain? You can damn well wait until I get back to my computer. I don't spend my life in front of it like you do DS.
Good god man, you must be dummer than dirt. cite |s?t| verb [ trans. ] (often be cited)
1 quote (a passage, book, or author) as evidence for or justification of an argument or statement, esp. in a scholarly work. ? mention as an example : medics have been cited as a key example of a modern breed of technical expert. ? Law adduce a former tried case as a guide to deciding a comparable case or in support of an argument.
So says the dictionary that came with my Mac.
or (n) citation, cite, acknowledgment, credit, reference, mention, quotation (a short note recognizing a source of information or of a quoted passage)
formatting link
you not understand English, gunny? What is your native tongue?
Yeah, they wouldn't let you get away with that crap.
Well, I guess you'll shortly be speaking to yourself then gunny.
Brave words, gunny, but just words. Wilson simply sees what the rest of us see, a clever, self absorbed, narcissistic, bag of wind (gave you the benefit of the doubt there).
OMG, you buffoons can't even get an insult right! Ya confused the sensory basics i.e. instead of "you enjoy listening to your self ...., You could say "I enjoy reading what I wrote" but that doesn't have the same effect does it, cuz ya should be proof reading what crap you both are writing. kinda like Billy's "citations".
Back OT , I can discount your author, Lowenfels, the one with the "soil foodweb" . Like all your "citations" to date, this is just conjecture, he lists no studies or research papers to show mineral salts kill micro organisms. His hook is the "soil foodweb" banner which is hyping the ACCTs. . Like selling bibles at a Billy Graham crusade.
Billy, I heard you graduated the 8th Grade twice so you should understand this; I don't want to be your book reviewer and I don't want anecdotal hyper BS obfucating what you stated . I want to see some valid scientific papers/research showing studies/ tests on how your statement mineral salts kill micro organism is true. I want to see the start, the test methods and the results which should be replicable. I don't want post hoc BS or the argument from authority. If one of your "citations" knows it to be true, then there is a study/paper on it, otherwise it is an unsubstantiated opinion.
Stop your habit of throwing out a lot of BS and stupid personal attacks to cover your propaganda. Now if you will excuse me, I have more important things to do, you once again cut into my allotted research time with your fantasy theories. Show me or shut up!
Couldn't figure it out, or getting lazy? If two authorities aren't enough, you won't open your eyes to see what you don't want to see. You don't like my authorities? What have you got? Never mind. We have more important things to do, than give you a chance to see your name in lights.
Billy, I heard you graduated the 8th Grade twice so you should understand this; I don't want to be your book reviewer and I don't want anecdotal hyper BS obfuscating what you stated . I want to see some valid scientific papers/research showing studies/ tests on how your statement mineral salts kill micro organism is true. I want to see the start, the test methods and the results which should be replicable. I don't want post hoc BS or the argument from authority. If one of your "citations" knows it to be true, then there is a study/paper on it, otherwise it is an unsubstantiated opinion.
Billy again pussyfoots, counters with even more BS:
WE? Are you in one of your Sybil personality modes again?
Once again your definition of an authority is BS ( scream louder, I'm on the Internet) . Unless you can give a valid reference to a scientific paper or some such research that one of your "citations" has actually accomplished or perhaps has knowledge of .....you make a false statement. It is certainly not out of the character for you to do that, you show a history of making up facts as you preach. When that doesn't seem to work, you attack ( which is more of your wussy Internet persona).
I am sure your first reference was a very good lawyer ( soil food web??? do check out where Dr. Ingram is working these days) and I'm sure some the second might be some fine master gardener. I have not read the latter because as I said, I am not going to be your book reviewer. You procrastinate again, son. We both know the reason. Regardless, you still cannot back up your lie(s) and you have been played into saying it so much, you own this one. Mineral salts do not kill micro organisms any more than manures do. You cannot justify this lie, no matter how hard you try nor how much you squawk.
Go back to your pretend Google book of the month review club and play up to your fan base. Seems they buy into your BS.
Gunner You can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time ... then there is Billy... who just hasn't got a clue.
I've given you two authorities for my position, gunnie. One , Jeff Lowenfel, Harvard University, geology; Northeastern University, law, and two, Dr. Joseph Schwarcz, the new chair of the ACCN Editorial Board, the director of McGill University's Office for Science and Society, a professor in the chemistry department and teaches nutrition and alternative medicine in McGill's Medical School.
Where is your degree from gunnie? Get help, you're sick.
No one is on Bill's ass, he did help Martin, kinda. This is all Billy's doing.
Like I said, good you show your Bud some support and I would like to believe you really standup for the underdog. I see no one did for Martin ( florabloom) Standing silent it not standing up, Charlie and you know that. Your man has a CS Bully personality.
Billy ain't figured this one out as yet. This is childish play, you bet, but has he answered the question, Of course not, because he cannot. it is a lie and he is weasling on it.
Yet this is all been for Nilly Billy's chicken shit attack he pulled on Florabloom. He lied and then attacked an innocent. You stand shoulder to shoulder to that?
Now he is caught up in it. He coulda got away with his pathological lying, hell, a few of his "citations" he googles are worth reading and he has got some folks believing his BS or too scared to say otherwise, don't know which one, don't care but to launch into a diatribe such as he did and attack a FNG for asking a question? naaa. No man gets to do that without some consequence. Florabloom played nice and he didn't get ANY support from this group.
You can't give a pass on this one Charlie and mean what you said about being a advocate.
Stand in,..... stand down......... all the same to me Charlie.
You are quite fickle, billy, and very comedic. The first source doesn't give any proof that of mineral salts kill micro organisms and his analogy of table salt and slugs is quite laughable. Course your source has no commerical interests does he?
As to the second source, isn't Dr Joe the one you and "your group" went to great lengths to denounce, calling him a Monsanto shrill? Why the sudden turn-about? Short term memory loss? Do you think he supports your use of scary numbers and false statistic fringe think?
Actually I find he is very anchored and mainstream, he certainly dismissed "your group" fringe think and you are still cherry picking his comments. That whole debacle was quite entertaining.
So enough of your silly games billy. As both of us know, mineral fertilizers do not kill SOMs when properly applied. You haven't found a peer reviewed scientific paper to prove this and you won't. I'm stepping out of this thread and letting you get back to your sermons. This one quite exhausted its purpose.
But do yourself a favor, when a man is asking advice to help his family, don't climb his ass, espcially with BS lies.
Not responding to anyone in particular in this "debate"\but googling Chemical fertilizer effects on soil microbes brought a lot of interesting stuff (good scientific word: stuff)
For great general information ( and there is a LOT of info here:
formatting link
I didn't read much of the blog/opinion sites. There is a great deal of study being done in China. I found these of interest:
formatting link
(Combined use of Chemical and Organic Fertilizer and/or Biofertilizer)
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.