|
Home > Archive > Lasik Eyes Surgery > January 2005 > Ragnar has been very good for business.
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Ragnar has been very good for business.
|
|
| Dr. Leukoma 2005-01-27, 8:53 am |
| I have noted a recent uptick in my business, speaking engagements, and
publications, all thanks to Ragnar.
Thank you Ragnar.
DrG
| |
|
| On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 17:57:48 -0500, Dr. Leukoma wrote
(in article <1106780268.901938.237770@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> ):
> I have noted a recent uptick in my business, speaking engagements, and
> publications, all thanks to Ragnar.
>
> Thank you Ragnar.
>
>
> DrG
It's interesting that your life seems to revolve around Ragnar and you assume
that others' do too.
--
~RT
________________________________________________
Hogwasher, Premier News and Mail for OS X
http://www.asar.com/cgi-bin/product.../hogwasher.html
________________________________________________
| |
| Dr. Leukoma 2005-01-27, 8:53 am |
| Are you smoking dope, man -- or woman?
Yes, you have been smoking dope.
DrG
| |
|
| On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 19:01:30 -0500, Dr. Leukoma wrote
(in article <1106784090.709520.42180@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> ):
> Are you smoking dope, man -- or woman? Yes, you have been smoking dope.
>
>
> DrG
Aww DrG, you just couldn't let an exchange go by with feeling compelled to
include in an insult or an obscenity. Do you speak to your patients like
this instead of keeping to topic? Do you accuse them of smoking dope? Have
you noticed that I don't post insults or obscenities? I debate the issues and
may disagree with your stance, argument, or presentation--but I don't resort
to insulting your person. That's the easy way out. I don't align myself with
this person's thinking or that person's, but develop my own opinions
independent of what others (especially on this NG) may think. So that's why
we actually agree on some things.
But when I say something you don't like...I'm smoking dope or worse. Hmmmm.
--
~RT
________________________________________________
Hogwasher, Premier News and Mail for OS X
http://www.asar.com/cgi-bin/product.../hogwasher.html
________________________________________________
| |
| Dr. Leukoma 2005-01-27, 8:53 am |
| Aww RT, you just couldn't let an exchange go by with feeling compelled
to
include in an insult or an obscenity. Do you speak to your patients
like
this instead of keeping to topic? Do you accuse them of smoking dope?
Have
you noticed that I don't post insults or obscenities? I debate the
issues and
may disagree with your stance, argument, or presentation--but I don't
resort
to insulting your person. That's the easy way out. I don't align myself
with
this person's thinking or that person's, but develop my own opinions
independent of what others (especially on this NG) may think. So that's
why
we actually agree on some things.
DrG
| |
| serebel 2005-01-27, 8:53 am |
| Ragnar's new lawyer (Ron Link esq.) will be drawing up a royalty
Scheme, er, scam, er contract to present to you. 
SErebel
| |
| Ragnar 2005-01-27, 8:53 am |
| On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 23:02:46 GMT, RT <RTMD24@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 17:57:48 -0500, Dr. Leukoma wrote
>(in article <1106780268.901938.237770@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> ):
>
>
>It's interesting that your life seems to revolve around Ragnar and you assume
>that others' do too.
I never did quite understand why RT seems to have some problem with me
since we agree on just about everything. The differences in minor
subtleites and nuances become irrelevant when someone like Dr.
Gemoules goes off the deep-end.
Hanson must be in 7th Heaven watching Dr. Leukoma fall to pieces. I
think it's pretty sad.
I was going to post proof of his lies right about now.. but I'm going
to let people absorb his childish posts of this evening before I post
the proof later on today. His kill filter might just work for a
change because I don't think he will be responding to that.
I predict he is going to try and dodge the bullet by changing the
subject. Perhaps we will hear about how all the 911 hijaakers had
mind control implants put in during LASIK surgery.
I think we all have a pretty good picture of the real
Dr.Gemoules/Leukoma by now. He's an ego-driven nutcase. He reminds
me in a way of a certain surgeon who thinks he's god and uses his
patients as guinea pigs to develop new procedures. Kind of like a Dr.
Mengele actually.
| |
| Ragnar 2005-01-27, 8:53 am |
| You are quite welcome!
Hmm.. is this the same Dr. Gemoules who was accusing me of libelous
damages yesterday? I think an apology is in order.
I assume you want me to continue to point out what a hypocrite you are
so you can get even more business?
My main intent is to get you to turn your brain on if that is
possible. You have a unique ability to rationalize totally opposing
ideas to suit your needs - within hours of each other.
What's it going to be tomorrow? Am I damaging you or helping you?
Neither is my intent.
On 26 Jan 2005 14:57:48 -0800, "Dr. Leukoma" <drg@leukoma.com> wrote:
>I have noted a recent uptick in my business, speaking engagements, and
>publications, all thanks to Ragnar.
>
>Thank you Ragnar.
>
>
>DrG
| |
| Ragnar 2005-01-27, 8:53 am |
| Who is he calling a woman? Me or RT?
Is that supposed to be an insult?
Seems to me that Dr. Gemoules has the attitude that people whom he
deems to be irrational must be either on drugs or female.
Interesting.
On 26 Jan 2005 16:01:30 -0800, "Dr. Leukoma" <drg@leukoma.com> wrote:
>Are you smoking dope, man -- or woman?
>Yes, you have been smoking dope.
>
>
>DrG
| |
| Ragnar 2005-01-27, 8:53 am |
| I didn't think of that!
He is a bloodhound when it comes to money.
On 26 Jan 2005 18:53:08 -0800, "serebel" <serebel@aol.com> wrote:
>Ragnar's new lawyer (Ron Link esq.) will be drawing up a royalty
>Scheme, er, scam, er contract to present to you.
>
>SErebel
| |
|
| On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 01:56:58 -0500, Ragnar wrote
(in article <9a3hv0d8iioi848o48clre2ulue4ot98cq@4ax.com> ):
> I never did quite understand why RT seems to have some problem with me since
> we agree on just about everything.
Ahem---you may agree with *me* on just about everything, but I don't always
agree with you. Be careful not to include "me" in your "we."
And I don't have a problem with "you" -- don't know who you are after all. I
do find many of Ragnar's posts and tactics appalling. Other side of the same
fanatic coin. But we are posting here under our NG "identities" no? Who is
RT?
Speaking of identities--noticed how Barnard stopped posting as soon as I
posted that I thought s/he was Ron Link?
--
~RT
________________________________________________
Hogwasher, Premier News and Mail for OS X
http://www.asar.com/cgi-bin/product.../hogwasher.html
________________________________________________
| |
| Dr. Leukoma 2005-01-27, 8:53 am |
| Here, let me help you:
1. Your posts are clearly libelous with intent to defame.
2. Because you attribute statements to me that I haven't made, then
berate me for having made them.
3. This is supposed to be a NG for the discussion of LASIK and other
refractive surgeries, yet you daily make me the subject, even when I
have not posted.
4. Regulars here understand it, but casual readers may not.
5. On Monday and Tuesday of this week, I had a new post-LASIK patient
and one new contact lens patient who actually said they had used the
internet to find me. What if they had stumbled across this NG?
6. It is well-known within this NG that you have emailed other
participants and asked them to participate in your diatribes.
7. You are probably a paid shill.
Now, you are welcome to address these items one by one.
DrG
| |
| Dr. Leukoma 2005-01-27, 8:53 am |
| I see that RT is still nursing a "hurt" from an a little disagreement
we had about "bias" and "objectivity." When I pointed out that
objectivity was possible, he/she argued that it was not because
everybody was biased (in this case, especially me). I maintained that
it is possible to describe the contents of a room or the physical
condition of a patient without injecting bias. It is also possible to
discuss the side-effects of LASIK, or the complication rate of LASIK,
without bias, if only we could agree on the terms.
Apparently, if I don't agree with RT it is because I do not understand
RT, when that isn't the case at all.
DrG
| |
| Ragnar 2005-01-28, 8:11 am |
| That oil has made you slick.
Do you think RT is so stupid that he's forgotten you suggested he was
smoking dope or is a woman?
On 27 Jan 2005 05:50:05 -0800, "Dr. Leukoma" <drg@leukoma.com> wrote:
>I see that RT is still nursing a "hurt" from an a little disagreement
>we had about "bias" and "objectivity." When I pointed out that
>objectivity was possible, he/she argued that it was not because
>everybody was biased (in this case, especially me). I maintained that
>it is possible to describe the contents of a room or the physical
>condition of a patient without injecting bias. It is also possible to
>discuss the side-effects of LASIK, or the complication rate of LASIK,
>without bias, if only we could agree on the terms.
>
>Apparently, if I don't agree with RT it is because I do not understand
>RT, when that isn't the case at all.
>
>DrG
|
| |
|
|