More Corporal Punishment Research

Below are studies that to my knowledge have not been discussed on
alt.parenting.spanking. I'm assuming there are individuals on this
newsgroup who are still interested in discussing this topic. Read the
studies and let's start a discussion!

Brenner, V., & Fox, R. (1998). Parental discipline and behavior
problems in young children. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 159(2),
251-256.

Day, R, Peterson, G., & McCracken, C. (1998) Predicting spanking of
younger and older children by mothers and fathers. Journal of Marriage
and the family, 60, 79-94.

Dietz, T., (2002) Disciplining children: Characteristics associated
with the use of corporal punishment. Child Abuse and Neglect, 24(2),
1529-1542.

Hashima, P. & Amato, P. (1994). Poverty, social support, and parental
behavior. Child Development. 65, 394-403.

Kanoy, K., Ulku-Steiner, B., Cox, M., & Burchinal, M. (2003). Marital
relationship and individual psychological characteristics that predict
physical punishment of children. Journal of Family Psychology, 17(1),
20-28.

LaVonne

Lavonne, you probably don't KNOW this, but even academic libraries cannot
subscribe to a plethora of journals.

Many of the titles are very expensive.

Medline occasionally (very) occasionally publishes abstracts of some journals.

BTW, Child Abuse and Neglect, which ASFAIK, is funded by my very SUBSTANTIAL
FEDERAL AND STATE taxes is NOT AVAILABLE ONLINE.

So the only folks debating the content of these articles would have to had
photocopied THESE PARTICULAR ARTICLES, which may not be AVAILABLE, except thru
loan, even at large state funded universities.

Doan, I can't believe it. She actually cited some scholarly articles. I can't
wait for the design of these experiments to be debated.

Slight problem of control groups, similar SES, etc.

Cheers!

http://www.fightcps. com California site where GRAND JURIES commonly
investigate CPS, DSS, DFS, DHS, etc.

On 2 Jul 2003, Fern5827 wrote:

Lavonne, you probably don't KNOW this, but even academic libraries cannot
subscribe to a plethora of journals.

Many of the titles are very expensive.

Medline occasionally (very) occasionally publishes abstracts of some journals.

BTW, Child Abuse and Neglect, which ASFAIK, is funded by my very SUBSTANTIAL
FEDERAL AND STATE taxes is NOT AVAILABLE ONLINE.

So the only folks debating the content of these articles would have to had
photocopied THESE PARTICULAR ARTICLES, which may not be AVAILABLE, except thru
loan, even at large state funded universities.

Doan, I can't believe it. She actually cited some scholarly articles. I can't
wait for the design of these experiments to be debated.

She bluffed and I called her bluff! Let's see if she response or will she
give me the deafenning silence? ;-)

Doan

Slight problem of control groups, similar SES, etc.

Cheers!

http://www.fightcps. com California site where GRAND JURIES commonly
investigate CPS, DSS, DFS, DHS, etc.

On 4 Jul 2003, Kane wrote:

(Fern5827) wrote in message ...
Lavonne, you probably don't KNOW this, but even academic libraries cannot
subscribe to a plethora of journals.

And tell us, Oh Vegetative One, the relevance of this statement,
beyond your silly attempt to now weasel out of admitting Doan was
wrong. There is research he thought she couldn't produce.

LOL! Tell me where did she produce the research I asked of her? Where
is one in which any of the non-cp alternatives has stood the same
statistical scrutiny as with spanking?

Many of the titles are very expensive.

The exisitence of such research was the issue, not the price.

Medline occasionally (very) occasionally publishes abstracts of some journals.

The shelves are open to anyone that wishes to read the research.
University libraries across the land, one of which Doan has ample
access to, have it all.

Of course I do. That is why I am so confident in challenging LaVonne and
your master, Chris Dunga to debate me on any of the studies she just
cited! C'mon, why are they so afraid? ;-)

BTW, Child Abuse and Neglect, which ASFAIK, is funded by my very SUBSTANTIAL
FEDERAL AND STATE taxes is NOT AVAILABLE ONLINE.

I do not recall this material as being relevant to the issue of
research on the use of cp in parenting...and I believe that was the
subject of the exchange and the demand by Doan the Diddly Bopper that
Lavonne produce citations of research.

No, Kane9 the stupid dog that think traceroutes is a security tool :-),
I asked "La Moron" to produce a study in which her non-cp alternatives
stood the same statistical scrutiny that spanking has been subjected to.
In short, comparing spanking and non-spanking alternatives under the
same condition, do non-cp alternatives fare any better? Straus &
Mouradian (1998) showed that non-cp alternatives have a STRONGER
correlation to ASB than spanking. The study result was so surprising
to Straus that he had to admit:

"Perhaps the most difficult methodological problem in research on the
effects of CP is posed by the the fact that child behavior problems lead
parents to spank. Thus the repeated finding that the more CP parents use,
the worse the behavior problems of the child does not necessarily show
that CP has harmful effects, or even that CP is not effective in reducing
misbehavior (as I erroneously argued in the past)."

Now do you know why Chris Dugan and LaVonne don't dare to debate me???
Doan

Why did you bring up this subject and complain about the cost? Just
another diversion?

So the only folks debating the content of these articles would have to had
photocopied THESE PARTICULAR ARTICLES, which may not be AVAILABLE, except thru
loan, even at large state funded universities.

Or have the research on their academic desktops.

Doan, I can't believe it.

You mustn't masturbate him publically. He's already making a total
fool of himself without your considerable help.

She actually cited some scholarly articles.

He bluffed. She called. You divert.

You do realize that you both are now just flapping your arms showing
us all that you have nowhere to go and nothing to say, don't you,
Plant?

In other words, it's Doans turn now. Lavonne returned the serve.

I can't
wait for the design of these experiments to be debated.

Sure you can, you and Doan both are diddy boppin' hoping that no one
notices that Lavonne called his bluff and you have nothing to respond
with but this babble.

Slight problem of control groups, similar SES, etc.

Which of course makes perfect sense, now doesn't it....well, as long
as you don't actually post the details of the "control groups", "the
similar SES".

You are talking about them, not revealing the actual content. So how
about it?

You going to put your cards on the table?

Cheers!

http://www.fightcps. com California site where GRAND JURIES commonly
investigate CPS, DSS, DFS, DHS, etc.

Doan then addresses the Vegetative One thusly:

On Fri, 4 Jul 2003 05:51:56 -0700, Doan wrote:

On 2 Jul 2003, Fern5827 wrote:

Lavonne, you probably don't KNOW this, but even academic libraries
cannot
subscribe to a plethora of journals.

Many of the titles are very expensive.

Medline occasionally (very) occasionally publishes abstracts of
some journals.

BTW, Child Abuse and Neglect, which ASFAIK, is funded by my very
SUBSTANTIAL
FEDERAL AND STATE taxes is NOT AVAILABLE ONLINE.

So the only folks debating the content of these articles would have
to had
photocopied THESE PARTICULAR ARTICLES, which may not be AVAILABLE,
except thru
loan, even at large state funded universities.

Doan, I can't believe it. She actually cited some scholarly
articles. I can't
wait for the design of these experiments to be debated.

She bluffed and I called her bluff!

And she then called your bluff with the requested citations...to which
you respond by losing track of how made the last call.

In other words, you are still bluffing. Turn over your cards. Let's
see what you've got.

In other words, address the research you asked her to produce and she
produced. You see, Puppy, it's YOUR turn now.

We await your brilliant response and refutation of the research
offered.

And if you recall you didn't ask her to defend the research, only to
produce it. She did.

Let's see if she response or will she
give me the deafenning silence? ;-)

Well, she responded with what you requested. The deafening silence you
are experiencing is filled only with the babble of two self
stimulating arm waving diversionary pimples on the butt of a hog: You
and The Plant.

You were so sure she couldn't produce, weren't you? r r r r r

Puppy.


Doan

So, Doan, just lay into that research now and call Lavonne on her
"bluff."

We wait.

Kane

Doan wrote in message ...
On 4 Jul 2003, Kane wrote:

(Fern5827) wrote in message ...
Lavonne, you probably don't KNOW this, but even academic libraries cannot
subscribe to a plethora of journals.

And tell us, Oh Vegetative One, the relevance of this statement,
beyond your silly attempt to now weasel out of admitting Doan was
wrong. There is research he thought she couldn't produce.

LOL! Tell me where did she produce the research I asked of her? Where
is one in which any of the non-cp alternatives has stood the same
statistical scrutiny as with spanking?

She offered the citations. It's up to you to now defend your claim,
that they do not present the same statistical scrutiny as applied to
the studies that support spanking.

Well?

You going to do it or are you going to continue standing their with
your dick in your hand attempting to divert folks from the fact you
opened the debate, Lavonne responded with what you asked for, and now
you don't want to actually debate anything, but to simply proclaim, as
is your style, yourself the winner.


Many of the titles are very expensive.

The exisitence of such research was the issue, not the price.

Medline occasionally (very) occasionally publishes abstracts of some journals.

The shelves are open to anyone that wishes to read the research.
University libraries across the land, one of which Doan has ample
access to, have it all.

Of course I do. That is why I am so confident in challenging LaVonne and
your master, Chris Dunga to debate me on any of the studies she just
cited! C'mon, why are they so afraid? ;-)

Chris got, if I recall correctly, somewhat tired of you declaing
yourself the winner in the face of defeat again and again. Claiming a
study says something it doesn't say is your favorite ploy. You tried
it again in this post. You simply left out the good parts, and declare
it means something it doesn't.

Your usual line of crap.

Lavonne is not afraid. You asked for studies she posted them. Now it's
up to you to show they don't meet the criteria.

BTW, Child Abuse and Neglect, which ASFAIK, is funded by my very SUBSTANTIAL
FEDERAL AND STATE taxes is NOT AVAILABLE ONLINE.

I do not recall this material as being relevant to the issue of
research on the use of cp in parenting...and I believe that was the
subject of the exchange and the demand by Doan the Diddly Bopper that
Lavonne produce citations of research.

No, Kane9 the stupid dog that think traceroutes is a security tool :-),

No, I didn't say that. Traceroutes simply help one track down folks. I
used them for that purpose, with the help, as I mentioned, of a number
of system admins that are friends of mine around the world. Why is it
you are once again trying that same silly ploy, declaring, without
quoting, someone else's statement was other than they said and meant?

I'll answer for you: because you are little puling pup far too
impressed with himself to know what it sees in the mirror....a lying
fool.

I asked "La Moron" to produce a study in which her non-cp alternatives
stood the same statistical scrutiny that spanking has been subjected to.

And she produced the studies. So tell us, and do a better job this
time than you have done in the past, on what grounds do they fail, and
provide proof by cite and qoute of those portions that you are
discussing.

In short, comparing spanking and non-spanking alternatives under the
same condition, do non-cp alternatives fare any better? Straus &
Mouradian (1998) showed that non-cp alternatives have a STRONGER
correlation to ASB than spanking. The study result was so surprising
to Straus that he had to admit:

"Perhaps the most difficult methodological problem in research on the
effects of CP is posed by the the fact that child behavior problems lead
parents to spank. Thus the repeated finding that the more CP parents use,
the worse the behavior problems of the child does not necessarily show
that CP has harmful effects, or even that CP is not effective in reducing
misbehavior (as I erroneously argued in the past)."

"does not necessarily show" tends to shoot down your claim, now
doesn't it? That means that it could show it to be true that cp is
harmful. It is unresolvable under the conditions Straus is referring
to.

Then we have "or even that CP is not effective in reducing
misbehavior". Reducing misbehavior is only a single criteria. I can
reduce misbehavior of another even more effectively with some physical
punishment. Just shoot the perp.

Straus leaves open the question of possible harm, in both statements.

Now do you know why Chris Dugan and LaVonne don't dare to debate me???

Because you are brainless twit? Yeah, that's got to be it.

Go and get a book on semantics, and also one on simple english
composition and parse the paragraph you are quoting...and I might also
suggest that you take more of the study in than just that narrow part
you wish to use to refute Lavonne and Chris.

One can prove anything if they are willing to confine themselves to
simple erroneous interpretations, and isolated bits of sentences and
paragraphs from a larger work.

Chris went over this very thing with you and your only response was to
run off hooting and swinging from limb to limb declaring yourself the
winner.

You are disgusting in your obtuseness and ability to lie.

And why is it you did not respond to my questions below?

Doan

No, Doan, we doan need you. Hell, the world doan need you.

Kane



Why did you bring up this subject and complain about the cost? Just
another diversion?

So the only folks debating the content of these articles would have to had
photocopied THESE PARTICULAR ARTICLES, which may not be AVAILABLE, except thru
loan, even at large state funded universities.

Or have the research on their academic desktops.

Doan, I can't believe it.

You mustn't masturbate him publically. He's already making a total
fool of himself without your considerable help.

She actually cited some scholarly articles.

He bluffed. She called. You divert.

You do realize that you both are now just flapping your arms showing
us all that you have nowhere to go and nothing to say, don't you,
Plant?

In other words, it's Doans turn now. Lavonne returned the serve.

I can't
wait for the design of these experiments to be debated.

Sure you can, you and Doan both are diddy boppin' hoping that no one
notices that Lavonne called his bluff and you have nothing to respond
with but this babble.

Slight problem of control groups, similar SES, etc.

Which of course makes perfect sense, now doesn't it....well, as long
as you don't actually post the details of the "control groups", "the
similar SES".

You are talking about them, not revealing the actual content. So how
about it?

You going to put your cards on the table?

Cheers!

http://www.fightcps. com California site where GRAND JURIES commonly
investigate CPS, DSS, DFS, DHS, etc.

Doan then addresses the Vegetative One thusly:

On Fri, 4 Jul 2003 05:51:56 -0700, Doan wrote:

On 2 Jul 2003, Fern5827 wrote:

Lavonne, you probably don't KNOW this, but even academic libraries
cannot
subscribe to a plethora of journals.

Many of the titles are very expensive.

Medline occasionally (very) occasionally publishes abstracts of
some journals.

BTW, Child Abuse and Neglect, which ASFAIK, is funded by my very
SUBSTANTIAL
FEDERAL AND STATE taxes is NOT AVAILABLE ONLINE.

So the only folks debating the content of these articles would have
to had
photocopied THESE PARTICULAR ARTICLES, which may not be AVAILABLE,
except thru
loan, even at large state funded universities.

Doan, I can't believe it. She actually cited some scholarly
articles. I can't
wait for the design of these experiments to be debated.

She bluffed and I called her bluff!

And she then called your bluff with the requested citations...to which
you respond by losing track of how made the last call.

In other words, you are still bluffing. Turn over your cards. Let's
see what you've got.

In other words, address the research you asked her to produce and she
produced. You see, Puppy, it's YOUR turn now.

We await your brilliant response and refutation of the research
offered.

And if you recall you didn't ask her to defend the research, only to
produce it. She did.

Let's see if she response or will she
give me the deafenning silence? ;-)

Well, she responded with what you requested. The deafening silence you
are experiencing is filled only with the babble of two self
stimulating arm waving diversionary pimples on the butt of a hog: You
and The Plant.

You were so sure she couldn't produce, weren't you? r r r r r

Puppy.


Doan

So, Doan, just lay into that research now and call Lavonne on her
"bluff."

We wait.

Kane

On 4 Jul 2003, Kane wrote:

Doan wrote in message ...
On 4 Jul 2003, Kane wrote:

(Fern5827) wrote in message ...
Lavonne, you probably don't KNOW this, but even academic libraries cannot
subscribe to a plethora of journals.

And tell us, Oh Vegetative One, the relevance of this statement,
beyond your silly attempt to now weasel out of admitting Doan was
wrong. There is research he thought she couldn't produce.

LOL! Tell me where did she produce the research I asked of her? Where
is one in which any of the non-cp alternatives has stood the same
statistical scrutiny as with spanking?

She offered the citations. It's up to you to now defend your claim,
that they do not present the same statistical scrutiny as applied to
the studies that support spanking.

Well?

Are you stupid enough to say that these studies compared spanking and
non-cp alternatives under the same conditions??? Go ahead, Kane.
Let's me see you stick all four feet into your mouth. :-0

You going to do it or are you going to continue standing their with
your dick in your hand attempting to divert folks from the fact you
opened the debate, Lavonne responded with what you asked for, and now
you don't want to actually debate anything, but to simply proclaim, as
is your style, yourself the winner.

LOL! Speaking like an "never-spanked" child! ;-) Are you now speaking
for LaVonne? Is she woman enough to defend herself or is she using her
little Kane9 to do her dirty work for her? ;-)

Doan


Many of the titles are very expensive.

The exisitence of such research was the issue, not the price.

Medline occasionally (very) occasionally publishes abstracts of some journals.

The shelves are open to anyone that wishes to read the research.
University libraries across the land, one of which Doan has ample
access to, have it all.

Of course I do. That is why I am so confident in challenging LaVonne and
your master, Chris Dunga to debate me on any of the studies she just
cited! C'mon, why are they so afraid? ;-)

Chris got, if I recall correctly, somewhat tired of you declaing
yourself the winner in the face of defeat again and again. Claiming a
study says something it doesn't say is your favorite ploy. You tried
it again in this post. You simply left out the good parts, and declare
it means something it doesn't.

Your usual line of crap.

Lavonne is not afraid. You asked for studies she posted them. Now it's
up to you to show they don't meet the criteria.

BTW, Child Abuse and Neglect, which ASFAIK, is funded by my very SUBSTANTIAL
FEDERAL AND STATE taxes is NOT AVAILABLE ONLINE.

I do not recall this material as being relevant to the issue of
research on the use of cp in parenting...and I believe that was the
subject of the exchange and the demand by Doan the Diddly Bopper that
Lavonne produce citations of research.

No, Kane9 the stupid dog that think traceroutes is a security tool :-),

No, I didn't say that. Traceroutes simply help one track down folks. I
used them for that purpose, with the help, as I mentioned, of a number
of system admins that are friends of mine around the world. Why is it
you are once again trying that same silly ploy, declaring, without
quoting, someone else's statement was other than they said and meant?

I'll answer for you: because you are little puling pup far too
impressed with himself to know what it sees in the mirror....a lying
fool.

I asked "La Moron" to produce a study in which her non-cp alternatives
stood the same statistical scrutiny that spanking has been subjected to.

And she produced the studies. So tell us, and do a better job this
time than you have done in the past, on what grounds do they fail, and
provide proof by cite and qoute of those portions that you are
discussing.

In short, comparing spanking and non-spanking alternatives under the
same condition, do non-cp alternatives fare any better? Straus &
Mouradian (1998) showed that non-cp alternatives have a STRONGER
correlation to ASB than spanking. The study result was so surprising
to Straus that he had to admit:

"Perhaps the most difficult methodological problem in research on the
effects of CP is posed by the the fact that child behavior problems lead
parents to spank. Thus the repeated finding that the more CP parents use,
the worse the behavior problems of the child does not necessarily show
that CP has harmful effects, or even that CP is not effective in reducing
misbehavior (as I erroneously argued in the past)."

"does not necessarily show" tends to shoot down your claim, now
doesn't it? That means that it could show it to be true that cp is
harmful. It is unresolvable under the conditions Straus is referring
to.

Then we have "or even that CP is not effective in reducing
misbehavior". Reducing misbehavior is only a single criteria. I can
reduce misbehavior of another even more effectively with some physical
punishment. Just shoot the perp.

Straus leaves open the question of possible harm, in both statements.

Now do you know why Chris Dugan and LaVonne don't dare to debate me???

Because you are brainless twit? Yeah, that's got to be it.

Go and get a book on semantics, and also one on simple english
composition and parse the paragraph you are quoting...and I might also
suggest that you take more of the study in than just that narrow part
you wish to use to refute Lavonne and Chris.

One can prove anything if they are willing to confine themselves to
simple erroneous interpretations, and isolated bits of sentences and
paragraphs from a larger work.

Chris went over this very thing with you and your only response was to
run off hooting and swinging from limb to limb declaring yourself the
winner.

You are disgusting in your obtuseness and ability to lie.

And why is it you did not respond to my questions below?

Doan

No, Doan, we doan need you. Hell, the world doan need you.

Kane



Why did you bring up this subject and complain about the cost? Just
another diversion?

So the only folks debating the content of these articles would have to had
photocopied THESE PARTICULAR ARTICLES, which may not be AVAILABLE, except thru
loan, even at large state funded universities.

Or have the research on their academic desktops.

Doan, I can't believe it.

You mustn't masturbate him publically. He's already making a total
fool of himself without your considerable help.

She actually cited some scholarly articles.

He bluffed. She called. You divert.

You do realize that you both are now just flapping your arms showing
us all that you have nowhere to go and nothing to say, don't you,
Plant?

In other words, it's Doans turn now. Lavonne returned the serve.

I can't
wait for the design of these experiments to be debated.

Sure you can, you and Doan both are diddy boppin' hoping that no one
notices that Lavonne called his bluff and you have nothing to respond
with but this babble.

Slight problem of control groups, similar SES, etc.

Which of course makes perfect sense, now doesn't it....well, as long
as you don't actually post the details of the "control groups", "the
similar SES".

You are talking about them, not revealing the actual content. So how
about it?

You going to put your cards on the table?

Cheers!

http://www.fightcps. com California site where GRAND JURIES commonly
investigate CPS, DSS, DFS, DHS, etc.

Doan then addresses the Vegetative One thusly:

On Fri, 4 Jul 2003 05:51:56 -0700, Doan wrote:

On 2 Jul 2003, Fern5827 wrote:

Lavonne, you probably don't KNOW this, but even academic libraries
cannot
subscribe to a plethora of journals.

Many of the titles are very expensive.

Medline occasionally (very) occasionally publishes abstracts of
some journals.

BTW, Child Abuse and Neglect, which ASFAIK, is funded by my very
SUBSTANTIAL
FEDERAL AND STATE taxes is NOT AVAILABLE ONLINE.

So the only folks debating the content of these articles would have
to had
photocopied THESE PARTICULAR ARTICLES, which may not be AVAILABLE,
except thru
loan, even at large state funded universities.

Doan, I can't believe it. She actually cited some scholarly
articles. I can't
wait for the design of these experiments to be debated.

She bluffed and I called her bluff!

And she then called your bluff with the requested citations...to which
you respond by losing track of how made the last call.

In other words, you are still bluffing. Turn over your cards. Let's
see what you've got.

In other words, address the research you asked her to produce and she
produced. You see, Puppy, it's YOUR turn now.

We await your brilliant response and refutation of the research
offered.

And if you recall you didn't ask her to defend the research, only to
produce it. She did.

Let's see if she response or will she
give me the deafenning silence? ;-)

Well, she responded with what you requested. The deafening silence you
are experiencing is filled only with the babble of two self
stimulating arm waving diversionary pimples on the butt of a hog: You
and The Plant.

You were so sure she couldn't produce, weren't you? r r r r r

Puppy.


Doan

So, Doan, just lay into that research now and call Lavonne on her
"bluff."

We wait.

Kane

On Fri, 4 Jul 2003, Doan wrote:

On 2 Jul 2003, Fern5827 wrote:

Lavonne, you probably don't KNOW this, but even academic libraries cannot
subscribe to a plethora of journals.

Many of the titles are very expensive.

Medline occasionally (very) occasionally publishes abstracts of some journals.

BTW, Child Abuse and Neglect, which ASFAIK, is funded by my very SUBSTANTIAL
FEDERAL AND STATE taxes is NOT AVAILABLE ONLINE.

So the only folks debating the content of these articles would have to had
photocopied THESE PARTICULAR ARTICLES, which may not be AVAILABLE, except thru
loan, even at large state funded universities.

Doan, I can't believe it. She actually cited some scholarly articles. I can't
wait for the design of these experiments to be debated.

She bluffed and I called her bluff! Let's see if she response or will she
give me the deafenning silence? ;-)

Doan

Well, LaVonne, it has been five days already. You said you read the
research. Are you going to debate against me on the research studies
you posted???

Doan

Doan wrote in message ...

sni..............p the nonsense.

It is now over two weeks and still no response from LaVonne. I wonder
why she is so afraid to debate me.

Because you don't debate?

And you give yourself far more importance than you warrant.

You are little more than a a bit of comic relief on this ng.

If she's afraid of anything it would be of breaking a rib from
laughter.

Personally I only read about 1 in 8 of your post they are so useless.
But when I'm bored it does give me a chuckle to watch your eager
little self congratulating bits of nonsense....and then
yaaaaaaaaaawn

Doan

Kane

I looks like LaVonne let Kane9 do the dirty work for her. What a pity!

Doan

On 19 Jul 2003, Kane wrote:

Doan wrote in message ...

sni..............p the nonsense.

It is now over two weeks and still no response from LaVonne. I wonder
why she is so afraid to debate me.

Because you don't debate?

And you give yourself far more importance than you warrant.

You are little more than a a bit of comic relief on this ng.

If she's afraid of anything it would be of breaking a rib from
laughter.

Personally I only read about 1 in 8 of your post they are so useless.
But when I'm bored it does give me a chuckle to watch your eager
little self congratulating bits of nonsense....and then
yaaaaaaaaaawn

Doan

Kane

Doan wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2003, Doan wrote:

On Wed, 9 Jul 2003, Doan wrote:


On Fri, 4 Jul 2003, Doan wrote:

On 2 Jul 2003, Fern5827 wrote:

Lavonne, you probably don't KNOW this, but even academic libraries cannot
subscribe to a plethora of journals.

Many of the titles are very expensive.

Medline occasionally (very) occasionally publishes abstracts of some journals.

BTW, Child Abuse and Neglect, which ASFAIK, is funded by my very SUBSTANTIAL
FEDERAL AND STATE taxes is NOT AVAILABLE ONLINE.

So the only folks debating the content of these articles would have to had
photocopied THESE PARTICULAR ARTICLES, which may not be AVAILABLE, except thru
loan, even at large state funded universities.

Doan, I can't believe it. She actually cited some scholarly articles. I can't
wait for the design of these experiments to be debated.

She bluffed and I called her bluff! Let's see if she response or will she
give me the deafenning silence? ;-)

Doan

Well, LaVonne, it has been five days already. You said you read the
research. Are you going to debate against me on the research studies
you posted???

Doan

Still no response to my post from LaVonne. It has been over a week
already. I wonder why the deafenning silence! ;-)

Doan

It is now over two weeks and still no response from LaVonne. I wonder
why she is so afraid to debate me.

Doan
-------------
Nobody's afraid of you, you stupid whore, you're simply tiresome and
non-responsive.
Steve