Your "Blasts" against true-prevention -- Neil Brooks

Discussion in 'Optometry Archives' started by otisbrown, Dec 31, 2005.

  1. otisbrown

    otisbrown Guest

    Dear Neil,

    Subject: Setting up a web page -- against the
    dynamic eye concept.

    Since you hate the concept of true-prevention with the plus,
    why not use your "brain cells" and set up your own
    web-site AGAINST the concept of true-prevention.

    That is explain youself. In fact, if you will
    keep your language "clean", I will "link" to
    your page, calling it a "layman" speaks out
    againt true-prevention with the plus.

    That will save you the problem of repeating youself.
    Type www.geocities.com or

    http://geocities.yahoo.com/gcp

    Then set up a page.

    Prove your techical ability to do so. If you need
    help let me know.

    Best,

    Otis
     
    otisbrown, Dec 31, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. otisbrown

    Neil Brooks Guest

    What a kindly gesture. Perhaps I have misjudged you.

    Here is my first attempt. Please feel free to comment, if you will.

    http://tinyurl.com/cqce3
     
    Neil Brooks, Dec 31, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. otisbrown

    Neil Brooks Guest

    What a kindly gesture. Perhaps I have misjudged you.

    Here is my first attempt. Please feel free to comment, if you will.

    http://tinyurl.com/cqce3
     
    Neil Brooks, Dec 31, 2005
    #3
  4. otisbrown

    Neil Brooks Guest

    So, Uncle Otie? What did you think??

    Are you ready to refer people to my site or what??

    Don't be bashful. If you can keep from using your usual profanity and
    vulgarity, I welcome constructive criticism.
     
    Neil Brooks, Dec 31, 2005
    #4
  5. otisbrown

    otisbrown Guest

    Dear Neil,

    I think you are a seriously "disturbed" person.

    I have never seen anyone take the actions you have taken -- beyond
    belief.

    All these ODs are completely "forgiven" -- if you are the
    type of person that walks in "off the street".

    If I were an OD -- you indeed would scare the hell out of me.

    I will let the "readers" of sci.med.vision judge the
    mentality of a person who posts these types of
    statements.


    IF your child has near-point esophoria.

    But readers of sci.med.vision post these kinds of
    statements? Would you trust a person like this?

    Neil's post:

    +==========

    Stop lying, Uncle Otie.


    Stop lying, Uncle Otie.


    Stop lying, Uncle Otie.


    Stop lying, Uncle Otie.


    Stop lying, Uncle Otie.


    Stop lying, Uncle Otie.


    Stop lying, Uncle Otie.


    Stop lying, Uncle Otie.


    Stop lying, Uncle Otie.


    Stop lying, Uncle Otie.


    Stop lying, Uncle Otie.


    Stop lying, Uncle Otie.


    Stop lying, Uncle Otie.


    Stop lying, Uncle Otie.


    Stop lying, Uncle Otie.


    Stop lying, Uncle Otie.


    Stop lying, Uncle Otie.


    Stop lying, Uncle Otie.


    Stop lying, Uncle Otie.


    Stop lying, Uncle Otie.


    Stop lying, Uncle Otie.


    Stop lying, Uncle Otie.


    Stop lying, Uncle Otie.


    Stop lying, Uncle Otie.

    ================

    I rest my case.

    Even the most dedicated "preventive" OD can not deal
    with this type of situation -- nor would I expect him
    to put himself "at risk" to the psychosis of
    Neil Brooks. My sympathy is with them.

    If fact, the ODs need advance no more logical
    arguments or analysis to judtify their silence.
    All they must say that we fear the "Neil Brooks"
    of this word -- and I understand perfectly.
    I hope others will also.


    Otis
     
    otisbrown, Jan 1, 2006
    #5
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.