On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 10:53:00 -0500, Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote
(in message <
[email protected]>):
Chung, Chung, Chung... where to start?
True to form, you have
presented me with such a bountiful supply of Chung-speak that I hardly
know where to begin
> Matti Narkia <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> <incoherent discourse with "Steve" snipped>
Coherency is only apparent to the truthful ;-)
>> Well, I think that the range is wide and criminals are on the other end of
>> the range. Still, I also think that I shouldn't leave my day job yet .
>
> And what is that, pray tell?
You seem to have some difficulty differentiating what Matti said from
what I said. Is English your ****fifth**** language???????
If you are asking me (as opposed to Matti), my day job is Executive
Director of the Chung Truth Squad.
>
>> Anyway, here are a couple of other links about this topic, no hint this
>> time ;-):
>>
>> <http://www.crisiscounseling.com/Articles/Psychopath.htm>
>> <http://bob.bob.bofh.org/~robm/misc/psycho.html>
>
> Hopefully, you aren't pursuing a web-based education in psychology.
Why not? Do you recommend I switch to a web-based education in
cardiology?
>
>>> I think a classical "Personality Disorder" is more likely.
>>>
>> Perhaps, pick your choice ;-) :
>
> But keep your day job, per Matti's rare wise suggestions.
Thanks, I plan to as described above.
>
>> <http://careconnection.osu.edu/diseasesandconditions/healthtopics/mentalhea
>> lth/personality/>
>
> Nice link that seems to describe "Steve"'s on-line persona.
Opinions may vary.
>
>>>> If so, our ranting may be wasted time.
>>>
>>> It is certainly a waste of time to think we will ever change Chung.
>>> However, there are new people arriving here and in the groups he
>>> intentionally cross-posts to who could be led into error on the basis
>>> of his "credentials". Warning them of the truth is probably
>>> worthwhile.
>>> There is also the troubling thought that he may have actual patients,
>>> although this seems unlikely given the amount of time he seems to have
>>> to surf the net and build his web site. It seems likely that if his
>>> judgement, professionalism, and character are so poor in the areas
>>> where we see them displayed, that these same shortcomings could easily
>>> translate to his patients. If so, he is indeed dangerous.
>>>
>>> On a higher plane, there is the old saying that "the only thing it
>>> takes for evil to prevail is for good men to keep silent" (or something
>>> like that )
>
> ..as the untruthful speak/write..
Sorry, English is my ***first*** language. I can't make heads or tails
of your comment here as it relates to the preceeding. Is this some
sort of Koan?
>
>> You're absolutely right about that,
>
> Thank you for agreeing, Matti.
Let's see... Matti agrees with my statements about you and you thank
him... uncommonly gracious of you, Chung.
>
>> although it sometimes feels that it's
>> making as much good as fighting against windmills like Don Quixote .
>
> Truth will prevail, Matti.
>
> "There will come a time when every knee will bend, every head will
> bow, and all will acknowledge that Christ is Lord..."
Um, and when might _that_ time be Chung? I don't want to miss it... it
should be quite a sight seeing all those Muslims, Hindus, Taoists,
Buddhists, et al bending the knee and bowing the head.
>
>>> Usenet is a community, albeit one without precedent. What keeps people
>>> in place in other communities is peer pressure and scorn for behavior
>>> which is unacceptable.
>
> ... and on the other extreme... martial law, terrorism, grown men
> running around wearing hoods and sheets to lynch those who they feel
> are "out of place (ie don't belong in their community)"...
>
> Which side of the spectrum does anonymous folks like "Steve" et al
> belong?
Why do you say I am anonymous, Chung? The dictionary defines anonymous
as "having no known name or identity" My name is Steve. I always post
as Steve. How is that any different than "Chung"?
On the other hand, you seem to have no problem with the person who
posts as variations of the name "Mu". How is that, Chung? Could it be
that "anonymity" is only a problem if someone disagrees with you?
>>> Because he dispenses medical advice, Chung
>>> seems to feel he has a "free pass" to interject his looney views on the
>>> 2PD
>
> The above speaks to "Steve"'s irrational bias.
Or "Chung"'s irrational diet ;-) Take your pick.
>
>>> and religion which are "Off Topic" in this group (and, in fact, in
>>> the other groups to which I have seen him post them).
>
> Actually, there is an established scientific link between obesity and
> medical problems (diabetes and heart disease). There is also an
> established link between religion/prayer and medical healing. So the
> truth is that both the 2PD approach and religion are "on topic" and
> not "off topic" as "Steve" would have folks believe.
So you are admitting there is no scientific link between
religion/prayer and medical healing?
If you believe the 2PD and religious discussions are "On Topic" for
this group, I challenge you to put the question to the group. Surely a
truthful person such as yourself cannot fear the truth.
>
>>> Also,
>>> intentional lying, twisting of words, false attributions, and false
>>> allegations should not be accepted.
>
> Correct.
Glad you agree.
>
>>> I think he should be challenged.
>
> I welcome it.
Funny, it doesn't seem like it. Seems like people who challenge you
end up on your libel or stalker page, have their messages maliciously
cross posted to other groups "for their convenience", have their
integrity, faith, or language comprehension challenged, and are
subjected to various other ad hominem attacks by you.
Perhaps it is the opportunity to attack them that you welcome.
>
>>> If he is not, it becomes the de facto community norm
>
> Christians becoming the Usenet community norm must be giving "Steve"
> et al nightmares.
Well, I can't speak for al, but I'm certainly not having any nightmares
about it. It is too far-fetched a possibility to even seriously
consider.
>
>>> and others will
>>> feel free to do the same.
>
> And start writing/postting truthfully and using their real names...
I write and post truthfully and Steve is my real name. To whom are you
referring? Mu, perhaps?
>
> No more pseudonyms or trading of personal insults...
Takes two to trade
>>> I also think he should be challenged when
>>> his medical views are wrong as you have so ably done.
>>>
>> Right again.
>
> Hardly.
So you don't think you should be challenged when your medical views are
wrong? Is this another example of the "Gift of Truth Discernment"
which you claim to have?
>
>>> The beauty of Chung is that he is so predictable...
>
> Truth is predictable. Truth is beautiful.
I believe this is the logical fallacy called the "Distributed Middle"
or "Affirming the Consequent". Par for Chung-logic, of course.
>
>>> like Pavlov's dogs.
>>> If you challenge him, he will prove the indictment in his response
>>> Accuse him of being a liar, and he will respond with a lie;
>
> Thieves are the quickest at accusing others of stealing.
> Cheaters the quickest at accusing other of cheating.
Distributed Middle. And I would like to see your references, since I
don't believe the claims anyway.
>
>>> accuse him
>>> of being a religious fanatic, and he will respond with fanaticism;
>
> Hmmm, I am in love with God. If that makes me a religious fanatic, so
> be it.
Sorry, try again. Being in love with God doesn't make one a religious
fanatic.
>
>>> accuse him of being a dissembler, and he will dissemble;
>
> Hmmm, I know how to write code in assembly language... don't see any
> utility in dissembling.
Res ipsa loquitur
>
>>> accuse him of
>>> being a hypocrite, and he will respond with hypocrisy.
>>
>> True.
>
> "Steve" is the last place you are likely to find anything true.
The issue under discussion in the instant case is hypocrisy, not truth.
Comprehension problems again?
>
> A word to the wise, that's all.
Thank you for agreeing that I am wise. I was starting to think that
might not be your opinion.
--
God's Other Humble Servant
Steve
