Why not visit alt.med.vision.improve ?

I would like to take this opportunity to invite some of our posters to
visit, and to at least become "informal moderators" at the Usenet
newsgroup entitled "alt.med.vision.improve".

The following persons (along with their multiple identities) would
make an excellent nucleas to get that newsgroup really up and running.

Otis Brown
Zetsu (with his multiple personnas all sharing the same hotmail
account)
Lena
Andrew

you could start your own little colony and set the rules. I'm sure
we'd all stop by every once in a while and visit.

On Aug 30, 9:37 pm, p.clar...@gmail.com wrote:
> I would like to take this opportunity to invite some of our posters to
> visit, and to at least become "informal moderators" at the Usenet
> newsgroup entitled "alt.med.vision.improve".
>
> The following persons (along with their multiple identities) would
> make an excellent nucleas to get that newsgroup really up and running.
>
> Otis Brown
> Zetsu (with his multiple personnas all sharing the same hotmail
> account)
> Lena
> Andrew
>
> you could start your own little colony and set the rules. I'm sure
> we'd all stop by every once in a while and visit.

There is also alt.phsychobabble.vision, highly recommended.

well okay i will visit that place but u didn't provide a link...

and also i dnt like the name, can u change it 2
'sci.med.vision.perfectsight', coz that sounds waay cooler! nd also
can u change the colour scheme... make it blue and white background
coz that is my fav color

neway itz booring if theres no other members... no1 2 argue wiv! whats
the point of that

On Aug 31, 2:33 am, Zetsu <absolutelyinvinci...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>:
> neway itz booring if theres no other members... no1 2 argue wiv! whats
> the point of that

this is exactly the point isn't it. you're just looking for an
argument.
thanks for demonstrating to everyone what a sick **** you are.

y r u so annoyed if i am lookin for an intelligent debate

why so much fear?

ur just scared coz ur crappy & false theories will go to hell, as will
ur sick distructiv profession of optometry

the real sick man iz u. u just like destroyin peoplez lives givin em
stupid glassses and these other crap. y dnt u learn a thing or two
from dr.bates... u might actually understand some useful stuff mate...
if thats evn possible for a dweeb of ur nature

Dear P.Clar,

It is you who should depart from sci.med.vision --
with your chronic foul language.

Why do not you clean up your language -- or
stop posting on sci.med.vision?

I suggest you set up your own version.

sci.med.vision.foulmouth

Where you can post on it to your heart's content.

Because you don't like the pont-of-view of some
posters here -- in no sense means they are wrong.

In fact, you might well be wrong with you
over-prescribed minus lens -- and your
arrogance about it.

The purpose of SCIENCE is to discover the
truth about this (and other issues).

In fact an OPEN discussion of these issues
can encourage others to think for themselves.

All the more reason to post on an OPEN forum -- to
see how intellectually BLIND you are to
the facts, and fundmental scientific questions.

Second-opinion best to all,

Otis




On Aug 31, 6:13 am, p.clar...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Aug 31, 2:33 am, Zetsu <absolutelyinvinci...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >:
> > neway itz booring if theres no other members... no1 2 argue wiv! whats
> > the point of that
>
> this is exactly the point isn't it. you're just looking for an
> argument.
> thanks for demonstrating to everyone what a sick **** you are.

On Aug 31, 5:40 am, Zetsu <absolutelyinvinci...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> y r u so annoyed if i am lookin for an intelligent debate
>
> why so much fear?
>
> ur just scared coz ur crappy & false theories will go to hell, as will
> ur sick distructiv profession of optometry
>
> the real sick man iz u. u just like destroyin peoplez lives givin em
> stupid glassses and these other crap. y dnt u learn a thing or two
> from dr.bates... u might actually understand some useful stuff mate...
> if thats evn possible for a dweeb of ur nature

Yes. Just think of all those people who never went on to accomplish
anything in their poor useless lives because they were forced to wear
eyeglasses. Otis, where are you?

Dear "L",

Subject: Some clarifications.

It is profoundly easy to quick-fix a person (after he has
INDUCED a negative refractive STATE in his eyes).

It is profoundly SIMPLE to do that.

I have no doubt (because of the PROVEN effect
of a -3 diopter lens on the eye), that the refractive
STATE of the fundamental eye FOLLOWS the
AVERAGE value of accommodation.
But of course you choose to understand NONE
of this.

So to reply:

> Yes. Just think of all those people who never went on to accomplish
> anything in their poor useless lives because they were forced to wear
> eyeglasses.

Here this loud and clear. No once is "forced" to wear
minus glasses. But the minus is often profoudly
over-prescribed. A person with verified 20/40 vision
will receive a -2 diopter lens -- and be told to
"wear it all the time", 16/7.

A young child with 20/60 vision, is PRESCRIBED a
-11 diopter lens (WOW), and the mother is led
to BELIEVE that the child should be FORCED
to wear that -11 diopter lens -- all the time.

Given the PROVEN effect of a -3 diopter lens on
the eye, I think that is a disaster for that young child.

DrL> Otis, where are you?

Otis> Where am I. I think that child's refractive STATE
will indeed go down very rapidly.

Otis> I think she should have been informed of the
PROVEN effect of a -3 diopter lens on the eye -- before
that child was put into a -11 diopter lens.

Otis> But that would have been a matter of RESPECTING
the mothers RIGHT to an informed choice in this
matter.

Otis> In its essence, I think that was Bate's position
on that wretched minus lens.


Otis





On Aug 31, 8:16 am, "Dr. Leukoma" <d...@leukoma.com> wrote:
> On Aug 31, 5:40 am, Zetsu <absolutelyinvinci...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > y r u so annoyed if i am lookin for an intelligent debate
>
> > why so much fear?
>
> > ur just scared coz ur crappy & false theories will go to hell, as will
> > ur sick distructiv profession of optometry
>
> > the real sick man iz u. u just like destroyin peoplez lives givin em
> > stupid glassses and these other crap. y dnt u learn a thing or two
> > from dr.bates... u might actually understand some useful stuff mate...
> > if thats evn possible for a dweeb of ur nature
>
> Yes. Just think of all those people who never went on to accomplish
> anything in their poor useless lives because they were forced to wear
> eyeglasses. Otis, where are you?

On Aug 31, 8:34 am, "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote:

> I have no doubt (because of the PROVEN effect
> of a -3 diopter lens on the eye), that the refractive
> STATE of the fundamental eye FOLLOWS the
> AVERAGE value of accommodation.

That's why hyperopia disappears, right?

-MT

On Aug 31, 7:16 am, "Dr. Leukoma" <d...@leukoma.com> wrote:
> On Aug 31, 5:40 am, Zetsu <absolutelyinvinci...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > y r u so annoyed if i am lookin for an intelligent debate
>
> > why so much fear?
>
> > ur just scared coz ur crappy & false theories will go to hell, as will
> > ur sick distructiv profession of optometry
>
> > the real sick man iz u. u just like destroyin peoplez lives givin em
> > stupid glassses and these other crap. y dnt u learn a thing or two
> > from dr.bates... u might actually understand some useful stuff mate...
> > if thats evn possible for a dweeb of ur nature
>
> Yes. Just think of all those people who never went on to accomplish
> anything in their poor useless lives because they were forced to wear
> eyeglasses. Otis, where are you?