Lance et compte

I see you have admitted defeat again, in the roundabout way you do.  Lacking any evidence to support you position now you try to change the subject.  It is a cowardly way of admitting defeat, though I guess you are sparing your ego by refusing to admit you have no facts.

Like an immature child that is always looking for the acceptance of his peers you focus on the votes.  Like a man who can stand on his own two feet I focus on the facts.  Popularity is not the same as accuracy, at your age you have not learned that, there is little hope for you.   Science is not a democracy, you cannot vote on the mass of an electron, or take a poll to see if a drug works.  Those things are measured on the weight of the evidence – evidence you sorely lack.

Your rantings remind me of something Roger M. Wilcox wrote about Reich another quack with a faithful following.  It fits you just as well:

“… [he] was not willing to stand upon the shoulders of giants. He stood only as high as his own experiences would allow, and from this low perch imagined himself to be a lone eagle soaring higher than any other man had ever reached.”

It is like he met you.  It is you to a tee.  From the delusions of grandeur and the imaginary foes, Don Quixote indeed – well chosen.   Are there some more windmills you should be attacking thinking they are giants?

You keep repeating the same things about parroting company line, but you also fail to come up with the studies that will prove you right that most natural medicines work most of the time.   But we both know that most studies point to the opposite.  So instead you choose (for the third time) to turn this into a personal battle.   Corinthian 3 : Knight Errant 0

Thinking that a persons bio matters in a discussion of facts is foolish.   A persons identity is at issue if they present themselves as the researcher.  If they make their arguments from authority then their credentials are in play.  When they are offering the works of other experts, then they are not part of the discussion.

Your insistence on finding out my background tells us you are not a competent debater, you lack focus, facts and you are prone to ad hominem attacks.  You have incompetence written all over you.