![]() |
|
|
|||
|
Dear Hans Egebo, dear Members
Hans Egebo posted this not long ago as a response to my previous post: >> Honestly, Hans W: You presented the case as a cancer case. The whole thread was about cancer, and you came out saying something like "why don't homeopaths dare to say they can cure cancer", then you presented the case story. When we are talking about cancer, and somebody says: "the tissue samples came back positive", what do you EXPECT people to think it means? << I answered all those question at the time when they arose in great detail. I expect from the reader to read exactly what is written and not to take his or her own interpretations as the basis for further comment. >> And, since you have stated that you do NOT KNOW the verdict on the tissue samples in question, what exactly is "positive" supposed to mean? << Here I want to draw your attention to my last post. The answer is already given there what it means. The ,,suppose’’ bit reveals the whole question to be of a rhetorical tool only, as in its entity no-one can even imagine what exactly the content of this question is. >> That, yes, these were indeed tissue samples? << May you doubt and remain in doubt forever – you are the only one who can change it. >> I'm sorry, Hans, but you brought this up in public yourself, and there is no way you can gloss it over. << This is your interpretation – It does not incur any feeling of guilt in me. -- >> But, let's not call it a lie, let's just say you were a bit creative, and let's move on, OK? << Hans Egebo called me a liar in public. If he changed his mind, then be it so. Either way, this has nothing to do with me personally, nor does it question my integrity. Personality stands out in the way one deals with ones own errors of judgement. I conclude the issue by stating, that I posted all the information in good faith.
__________________
Hans Weitbrecht Consultant Homeopath |
|
|||
|
I see no reason to drag this out further. We have had our differences, we probably always will. My only real interest here is sensible debate. Let us agree to disagree, and move on.
Hans
__________________
<i>You have a right to your own opinion, but not to your own facts.</i> |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Hans Egebo, skeptic or sloppy thinker? | Dana Ullman, MPH | Research and the Scientific Validity of Homeopathy | 42 | 4th July 2005 07:33 AM |
| How homeopathy can works, scientifically? | kayveeh | Research and the Scientific Validity of Homeopathy | 286 | 20th June 2005 12:07 PM |
| Dear Hans EGEBO | Hans Weitbrecht | Homeopathy List Discussion | 2 | 22nd May 2005 02:29 PM |
| Dear Hans Weitbrecht | David Little | Homeopathy List Discussion | 6 | 29th November 2004 06:30 PM |
| Clusters as storage medium? | MRC_Hans | Homeopathy Discussion | 120 | 13th November 2003 08:37 PM |