Very interesting.

This post is from before he was murdered by the police (in 1997) and then
resurrected by the holy spirit.

"Truth" <yamant... at (no spam) aol.com> wrote in message

news:4949eb87-50ec-414a-89dc-515c251c5d54 at (no spam) k10g2000prm.googlegroups.com...





http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med/browse_thread/thread/446f5283a...

------begin Chung post-------------
Andrew Chung    View profile
 More options Jul 31 1996, 12:00 am

Newsgroups: sci.med
From: Andrew Chung <ach... at (no spam) emory.edu
Date: 1996/07/31
Subject: Ban Conklin From This Newsgroup
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
IMHO, it is in this newsgroup's best interest to lock-out Mr. Conklin
from
posting on this newsgroup.

Reasons:

(1) He is responsible for far more misinformation and
misinterpretations
than anyone else.  This is compounded by his posting more than anyone
else.

(2) He has no formal training in medicine and has demonstrated no
real
interest in the art of medicine.  His postings can be moved in bulk
to
the politics newsgroups.  Actually, many are already cross-posted
there.

(3) His arguments often degenerate to irrational ramblings about a
national database and the hurling of personal insults.  He has called
people liars when they don't agree with his "statistics" from the
"national database."

(4) He really is *not* making any contributions to this newsgroup.

Andrew Chung
http://userwww.service.emory.edu/~achung

-----end Chung post------

Isn't that interesting. Chung wanted someone banned for the exact same
behavior and traits of character for which Chung himself is now
notorious. With a few substitutions of words, such as "religious
newsgroups" instead of politics newsgroups the above description fits
Chung to a tee.

Hey Chung, how about we use your own logic when you still had half a
brain and ban YOU from this newsgroup?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Very interesting.

This post is from before he was murdered by the police (in 1997) and then
resurrected by the holy spirit.

"Truth" <yamant... at (no spam) aol.com> wrote in message

news:4949eb87-50ec-414a-89dc-515c251c5d54 at (no spam) k10g2000prm.googlegroups.com...





http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med/browse_thread/thread/446f5283a...

------begin Chung post-------------
Andrew Chung    View profile
 More options Jul 31 1996, 12:00 am

Newsgroups: sci.med
From: Andrew Chung <ach... at (no spam) emory.edu
Date: 1996/07/31
Subject: Ban Conklin From This Newsgroup
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
IMHO, it is in this newsgroup's best interest to lock-out Mr. Conklin
from
posting on this newsgroup.

Reasons:

(1) He is responsible for far more misinformation and
misinterpretations
than anyone else.  This is compounded by his posting more than anyone
else.

(2) He has no formal training in medicine and has demonstrated no
real
interest in the art of medicine.  His postings can be moved in bulk
to
the politics newsgroups.  Actually, many are already cross-posted
there.

(3) His arguments often degenerate to irrational ramblings about a
national database and the hurling of personal insults.  He has called
people liars when they don't agree with his "statistics" from the
"national database."

(4) He really is *not* making any contributions to this newsgroup.

Andrew Chung
http://userwww.service.emory.edu/~achung

-----end Chung post------

Isn't that interesting. Chung wanted someone banned for the exact same
behavior and traits of character for which Chung himself is now
notorious. With a few substitutions of words, such as "religious
newsgroups" instead of politics newsgroups the above description fits
Chung to a tee.

Hey Chung, how about we use your own logic when you still had half a
brain and ban YOU from this newsgroup?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

It's amazing how much more articulate Andrew was back then. In the 2000 post
originating the 2PD (which you reposted below), he was at least able to
discuss the plusses and minuses of it without resorting to insults and he
didn't inject a single biblical justification.

Andrew, now you are incapable of having a rational discussion -- you're
reduced to calling people satan and reposting nonsensical statements or
links over and over. Do you ever go back and read your old posts and ask
yourself if things haven't been spiraling downward for you in terms of
intellect, temper, etc? Can you honestly tell yourself that life has
gotten better for you over the years? Come on, man, get some help.

Truth, what's "lowelling"? Izzat good or bad?

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med/browse_thread/thread/446f5283a177b0b1/ed2c2c83f9a40225?lnk=st&q=#ed2c2c83f9a40225


------begin Chung post-------------
Andrew Chung View profile
More options Jul 31 1996, 12:00 am

Newsgroups: sci.med
From: Andrew Chung <ach... at (no spam) emory.edu
Date: 1996/07/31
Subject: Ban Conklin From This Newsgroup
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
IMHO, it is in this newsgroup's best interest to lock-out Mr. Conklin
from
posting on this newsgroup.


Reasons:


(1) He is responsible for far more misinformation and
misinterpretations
than anyone else. This is compounded by his posting more than anyone
else.


(2) He has no formal training in medicine and has demonstrated no
real
interest in the art of medicine. His postings can be moved in bulk
to
the politics newsgroups. Actually, many are already cross-posted
there.


(3) His arguments often degenerate to irrational ramblings about a
national database and the hurling of personal insults. He has called
people liars when they don't agree with his "statistics" from the
"national database."


(4) He really is *not* making any contributions to this newsgroup.


Andrew Chung
http://userwww.service.emory.edu/~achung

-----end Chung post------

Isn't that interesting. Chung wanted someone banned for the exact same
behavior and traits of character for which Chung himself is now
notorious. With a few substitutions of words, such as "religious
newsgroups" instead of politics newsgroups the above description fits
Chung to a tee.

Hey Chung, how about we use your own logic when you still had half a
brain and ban YOU from this newsgroup?

On May 22, 12:35 am, Truth <yamant... at (no spam) aol.com> wrote:

Chung, your inane, repetitive, Bible-babble posts prove that you are a
mentally ill fruitcake. You are no longer fit to practice medicine and
your case is most likely being presented to the Georgia Composite
Medical Board when they next convene in June. You have made your own
bed and will lie in it.

I will not bother to remove the Christian newsgroups from the header
this time, since every time I do so to spare the good Christians your
nonsense, you just add the headers back. Since you are so intent on
showing these normal, well meaning Christians how evil and twisted you
are I won't stand in your way anymore.

I apologize in advance to all of the Christian newsgroups that have to
put up with Chung's cross-posted Chung Dung messages.

Please report his posts as abuse to Google by going to the upper right
hand side and clicking on the "report this post" option.

Chung uses multiple Google accounts with which to spam newsgroups with
his unwelcomed, off topic spam spews. And everytime someone trims the
headers, Chung just adds all the newsgroups back.

Gee, you and others, keep saying the same repetitious things and
Chung responds in the same way and then you respond and it goes on ad
nauseum. The way to deal with trolls like Chung is to ignore them, not
to feed them - a troll thrives on negative comments and complaints
such as yours and others and this one too.

So Google will drop an account and Chung will just open more or use a
news reader where you do not even have to sign in to Google and can
make up false addresses like truth at (no spam) truth.com.

So the Board will take away his license, but that will not stop him
from posting here - can anyone tale away his degress - if not, very
little will change.

To think that any sane person will believe what he says is hard to
believe.

It seems the anti-spammers are spamming themselves.

activ wrote:

On May 22, 12:35 am, Truth <yamant... at (no spam) aol.com> wrote:
Chung, your inane, repetitive, Bible-babble posts prove that you are a
mentally ill fruitcake. You are no longer fit to practice medicine and
your case is most likely being presented to the Georgia Composite
Medical Board when they next convene in June. You have made your own
bed and will lie in it.

I will not bother to remove the Christian newsgroups from the header
this time, since every time I do so to spare the good Christians your
nonsense, you just add the headers back. Since you are so intent on
showing these normal, well meaning Christians how evil and twisted you
are I won't stand in your way anymore.

I apologize in advance to all of the Christian newsgroups that have to
put up with Chung's cross-posted Chung Dung messages.

Please report his posts as abuse to Google by going to the upper right
hand side and clicking on the "report this post" option.

Chung uses multiple Google accounts with which to spam newsgroups with
his unwelcomed, off topic spam spews. And everytime someone trims the
headers, Chung just adds all the newsgroups back.
Gee, you and others, keep saying the same repetitious things and
Chung responds in the same way and then you respond and it goes on ad
nauseum. The way to deal with trolls like Chung is to ignore them, not
to feed them - a troll thrives on negative comments and complaints
such as yours and others and this one too.

So Google will drop an account and Chung will just open more or use a
news reader where you do not even have to sign in to Google and can
make up false addresses like truth at (no spam) truth.com.

So the Board will take away his license, but that will not stop him
from posting here - can anyone tale away his degress - if not, very
little will change.

To think that any sane person will believe what he says is hard to
believe.

It seems the anti-spammers are spamming themselves.


Bravo!

The best way to deal with trolling is to post
as many on-topic and substantive messages as possible.

[theology]
There is no reason to think that God has to exist
in the mode prescribed by human beings.
At most, we can study His revelations.
But once you accept something as a revelation,
you have already accepted His existence.
So, it comes down to whether we have any revelations.
But strangely, anything and everything can be
God's revelation depending on our perspectives.
So, it would be simpler to view Him
as the ultimate point of reference and
as prior to existence.
[/theology]

monkfish wrote:

[theology]
There is no reason to think that God has to exist
in the mode prescribed by human beings.
At most, we can study His revelations.
But once you accept something as a revelation,
you have already accepted His existence.
So, it comes down to whether we have any revelations.
But strangely, anything and everything can be
God's revelation depending on our perspectives.
So, it would be simpler to view Him
as the ultimate point of reference and
as prior to existence.
[/theology]



1 - There is no reason to believe that gos exists - period.
2 - A god that exists in a way that is incomprehensible to humans is not
the god of religion - where specific statements are made about their
god. If you agree that a god exists in a way that is incomprehensible to
humans - you agree that religion is WRONG.

convicted neighbor Thom Madura wrote:
friend MU wrote:
convicted neighbor Thom Madura wrote:

1 - There is no reason to believe that god exists - period.
2 - A god that exists in a way that is incomprehensible to humans is not
the god of religion - where specific statements are made about their
god. If you agree that a god exists in a way that is incomprehensible to
humans - you agree that religion is WRONG.

Mu goodness, what a Bunch of babbling pseudo-atheism.

Problem is - I am not an atheist.
I do not believe in religion.

What does it mean for you to believe in God?

convicted friend monkfish wrote:



convicted neighbor Thom Madura wrote:
friend MU wrote:
convicted neighbor Thom Madura wrote:

1 - There is no reason to believe that god exists - period.
2 - A god that exists in a way that is incomprehensible to humans is not
the god of religion - where specific statements are made about their
god. If you agree that a god exists in a way that is incomprehensible to
humans - you agree that religion is WRONG.

Mu goodness, what a Bunch of babbling pseudo-atheism.

Problem is - I am not an atheist.
I do not believe in religion.

What does it mean for you to believe in God?

"My LORD and my GOD!" -- archetypal atheist "doubting" Thomas upon
seeing the risen Jesus Christ.

May we, who are Christians, continue to pray for your perishing soul,
dear Monkfish:

Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
convicted friend monkfish wrote:
convicted neighbor Thom Madura wrote:
friend MU wrote:
convicted neighbor Thom Madura wrote:

1 - There is no reason to believe that god exists - period.
2 - A god that exists in a way that is incomprehensible to humans is not
the god of religion - where specific statements are made about their
god. If you agree that a god exists in a way that is incomprehensible to
humans - you agree that religion is WRONG.

Mu goodness, what a Bunch of babbling pseudo-atheism.

Problem is - I am not an atheist.
I do not believe in religion.

What does it mean for you to believe in God?

"My LORD and my GOD!" -- archetypal atheist "doubting" Thomas upon
seeing the risen Jesus Christ.

May we, who are Christians, continue to pray for your perishing soul,
dear Monkfish:

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/c7ed7333f1ce01f2?

NOW you did it.

Whatever it was you did.

See you in hell, monk.

....... "doubting" Thomas .....

satan via a sockpuppet (corporeal demon) despairingly posted: