Dr. K's UNANSWERED QUESTION TO SNAKE-OIL SELLER, MARK PROBERT REGARDING MERCURY

I just saw that Dr. K has several times asked disbarred attorney Mark
Probert this same important question.

"Mr. Probert.
I will ask the question again.
Do you think that it is wise to inject mercury, a highly neurotoxic
substance, into children?"

Because I have years of experience as Probert's "mark" I'd like to
share this info with Dr. K.

1) When the Supreme Court of NY was in the process of disbarring
Probert in the early 90's ... he refused to answer their questions
also.

http://www.BreastImplantAwareness.or...m#Mark-Probert

2) Probert's lies for the vaccine pushers have been going on for
years.

He had the audacity to claim that no one was allergic to mercury.
http://humanticsfoundation.com/propagandistprobert.html

Denying his disbarment is just one of the many, many, many lies that
Probert spreads throughout the Internet, while advertising the
propaganda of Stephen Joel Barrett's, Healthfraud and Quackwatch
Groups.

Here is Probert lying about mercury on March 14, 2005. Typical Snake
oil propaganda.

"Remember, you cannot have an allergic reaction to Mercury. "

As part of the Disinformation Campaign put out by the vast dental
industry denying the dangers of mercury and amalgam, Probert parroted
this lie. There is an enormous amount of information available as to
the subset of individuals who show a strong allergic reaction to
mercury. Here is but a small sampling.


http://www.cfsn.com/melisa.html

Systemically induced allergic exanthem from mercury.

Allergy Unit, Department of Dermatology, University Hospital, Basel,
Switzerland.

Recovery from mercury-induced burning mouth syndrome due to mercury
allergy.

Department of Dermatological Sciences, University of Milan, Ospedale
Maggiore-IRCCS, Milan, Italy.

On Mar 2, 2:25*pm, Ilena Rose wrote:
I just saw that Dr. K has several times asked disbarred attorney Mark
Probert this same important question.

And I answered it the first time. Dr. K even responded to that post.
He has reading issues.

Do try to keep it civil.

On Mar 2, 8:40*pm, Mark Probert wrote:
On Mar 2, 2:25*pm, Ilena Rose wrote:

I just saw that Dr. K has several times asked disbarred attorney Mark
Probert this same important question.

And I answered it the first time. Dr. K even responded to that post.
He has reading issues.

Do try to keep it civil.

Yes Mark, please try to keep it civil if that is possible for you.
Thanks for the "heads up" on my reading issues. I will be sure to work
on it.

Cheers

On Mar 2, 8:47*pm, wrote:
On Mar 2, 8:40*pm, Mark Probert wrote:

On Mar 2, 2:25*pm, Ilena Rose wrote:

I just saw that Dr. K has several times asked disbarred attorney Mark
Probert this same important question.

And I answered it the first time. Dr. K even responded to that post.
He has reading issues.

Do try to keep it civil.

Yes Mark, please try to keep it civil if that is possible for you.

By now, you should have been able to discern that I do keep it civil,
when the other party keeps it civil. Note how I am followed around by
a junk yard dog yelping at my heels, and how I am gratuitously
attacked by several posters.

Sadly, I do not expect you to see that, or acknowledge these facts.
You seem to have allied yourself with a stalker, a bigot and Tim
Bolen, who defies simple description.

On Mar 7, 6:59*am, Mark Probert wrote:
On Mar 2, 8:47*pm, wrote:

On Mar 2, 8:40*pm, Mark Probert wrote:

On Mar 2, 2:25*pm, Ilena Rose wrote:

I just saw that Dr. K has several times asked disbarred attorney Mark
Probert this same important question.

And I answered it the first time. Dr. K even responded to that post.
He has reading issues.

Do try to keep it civil.

Yes Mark, please try to keep it civil if that is possible for you.

By now, you should have been able to discern that I do keep it civil,
when the other party keeps it civil. Note how I am followed around by
a junk yard dog yelping at my heels, and how I am gratuitously
attacked by several posters.

Sadly, I do not expect you to see that, or acknowledge these facts.
You seem to have allied yourself with a stalker, a bigot and Tim
Bolen, who defies simple description.

I simply seek the truth wherever it takes me.No alliances unlike you
and your gang. That is your projection.
I have changed my mind on many of my former beliefs by objectively
looking at the facts.
Do I have all the answers? Of course not. I have freely admitted that.
Truth is is a constant search that only can move forward with an open
mind.

On Mar 7, 8:20*am, wrote:
On Mar 7, 6:59*am, Mark Probert wrote:





On Mar 2, 8:47*pm, wrote:

On Mar 2, 8:40*pm, Mark Probert wrote:

On Mar 2, 2:25*pm, Ilena Rose wrote:

I just saw that Dr. K has several times asked disbarred attorney Mark
Probert this same important question.

And I answered it the first time. Dr. K even responded to that post.
He has reading issues.

Do try to keep it civil.

Yes Mark, please try to keep it civil if that is possible for you.

By now, you should have been able to discern that I do keep it civil,
when the other party keeps it civil. Note how I am followed around by
a junk yard dog yelping at my heels, and how I am gratuitously
attacked by several posters.

Sadly, I do not expect you to see that, or acknowledge these facts.
You seem to have allied yourself with a stalker, a bigot and Tim
Bolen, who defies simple description.

I simply seek the truth wherever it takes me.

Fair enough.We'll follow the truth train down the tracks.

No alliances unlike you
and your gang.

Well, you just fell off the truth train. There is no alliance, except
in the mind of thos people who need to believe that there is because
they want to dismiss what refutes their firmly held beliefs and do not
want to address facgts that they either cannot understand or refute.

That is your projection.

Wrong. Consider me a black body.

I have changed my mind on many of my former beliefs by objectively
looking at the facts.

Great. Back on track for the truth train.

Do I have all the answers? Of course not.

No one does.

I have freely admitted that.
Truth is is a constant search that only can move forward with an open
mind.-

Quite true.

On Mar 7, 7:31*pm, Mark Probert wrote:
On Mar 7, 8:20*am, wrote:





On Mar 7, 6:59*am, Mark Probert wrote:

On Mar 2, 8:47*pm, wrote:

On Mar 2, 8:40*pm, Mark Probert wrote:

On Mar 2, 2:25*pm, Ilena Rose wrote:

I just saw that Dr. K has several times asked disbarred attorney Mark
Probert this same important question.

And I answered it the first time. Dr. K even responded to that post.

In message , wrote:

The problem with searching for the truth is that there are, in my
opinion, groups like the quackbusters that deliberately distort the
truth, do not report objectively, and attack and defame individuals
that do not agree with their objectives.They have a huge PR machine
that could be used for the greater good but, in my opinion, is instead
used to support special interests that is not necessarily in the
public interest.
That is not to say that there are not people and therapies that may
belong on their list. But the motives, methods, and selective
reporting is, in my opinion, quite destructive.

Sounds like Stage II progressing to Stage III.
Anyone care to comment?

--
| The most important exclamation in science isn't "Eureka!" |
| The most important exclamation is "What the BLEEP?" |
+---------- D. C. Sessions ----------+

On Mar 7, 7:43*pm, wrote:
On Mar 7, 7:31*pm, Mark Probert wrote:





On Mar 7, 8:20*am, wrote:

On Mar 7, 6:59*am, Mark Probert wrote:

On Mar 2, 8:47*pm, wrote:

On Mar 2, 8:40*pm, Mark Probert wrote:

On Mar 2, 2:25*pm, Ilena Rose wrote:

I just saw that Dr. K has several times asked disbarred attorney Mark
Probert this same important question.

And I answered it the first time. Dr. K even responded to that post.
He has reading issues.

Do try to keep it civil.

Yes Mark, please try to keep it civil if that is possible for you.

By now, you should have been able to discern that I do keep it civil,
when the other party keeps it civil. Note how I am followed around by
a junk yard dog yelping at my heels, and how I am gratuitously
attacked by several posters.

Sadly, I do not expect you to see that, or acknowledge these facts.
You seem to have allied yourself with a stalker, a bigot and Tim
Bolen, who defies simple description.

I simply seek the truth wherever it takes me.

Fair enough.We'll follow the truth train down the tracks.

No alliances unlike you

and your gang.

Well, you just fell off the truth train. There is no alliance, except
in the mind of thos people who need to believe that there is because
they want to dismiss what refutes their firmly held beliefs and do not
want to address facgts that they either cannot understand or refute.

That is your projection.

Wrong. Consider me a black body.

I have changed my mind on many of my former beliefs by objectively
looking at the facts.

Great. Back on track for the truth train.

Do I have all the answers? Of course not.

No one does.

I have freely admitted that.

Truth is is a constant search that only can move forward with an open
mind.-

Quite true.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The problem with searching for the truth is that there are, in my
opinion, groups like the quackbusters that deliberately distort the
truth,

I have read many articles on Quackwatch. There are some with which I
disagree. However, there are many that are factually accurate.

For real truth distortion, view Bolen's bilge. I have yet to find a
reality based article on his site.

do not report objectively, and attack and defame individuals
that do not agree with their objectives.

Disagree. They report the activities of people whom they feel are
dangerous, or wasteful of people's money, time and hope..If those
people's actions are defamatory, then it is their problem.

They have a huge PR machine

Not acording to Bolen. He claims that it is operated from a
basement.

that could be used for the greater good but, in my opinion, is instead
used to support special interests that is not necessarily in the
public interest.

See above. Exposing quackery is in the public interest.

That is not to say that there are not people and therapies that may
belong on their list. But the motives, methods, and selective
reporting is, in my opinion, quite destructive

Your brush is very broad.

In article ,
wrote:

The problem with searching for the truth is that there are, in my
opinion, groups like the quackbusters that deliberately distort the
truth, do not report objectively, and attack and defame individuals
that do not agree with their objectives.

Gee, and the alternative health crowd would NEVER do anything like
that, now would they? I mean, we wouldn't see the anti-vaccine
militia using the Poling case to claim that vaccines cause autism.

They have a huge PR machine that could be used for the greater good
but, in my opinion, is instead used to support special interests that
is not necessarily in the public interest.

Wow, a "huge PR machine?" Where do you come up with this stuff?

If there was such a huge PR machine involved, we would't be seeing all
these nitwit "vaccines cause autism" stories over the last few days.

That is not to say that there are not people and therapies that may
belong on their list. But the motives, methods, and selective
reporting is, in my opinion, quite destructive.

"May" belong on their list? Like there's any doubt that there are
plenty such?

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down on?"
-- Bill Maher