With Fox thinking that was plagarism it's not so hard to see why copyright law is royally fucked in the US at the moment.

Is it too much to expect te media to know what Plagarism actually is??

Of To We. Indeed.

The deconstruction of the 'plagarism' was frickin brilliant!

^lol. thanks for trying to help. I'm open to hearing rembars rebuttal of the article he mentioned that he wrote up. It's ashame that he had to go off on some wild plagarism conspiracy before posting it. But if it's like his other assertions then it might be what's left out of his comments that speak to his distorting of the issue.
Professional-Perspectives-Fluoride-in-Tap-Water
(use of copy & paste is okay for him to back up his point of view apparently)

But seriously, if you can start by explaining to me why the scientist (and her work) mentioned in this video The-Flouride-Deception is not considered to be credible enough to make it into the science sift. Perhaps had that been explained in the first place I'd be able to better understand your point.

as I've pointed out, rembar first stated he wasn't disputing her work, but then went to the other extreme by stating "IT IS BAD SCIENCE AND SO IT GETS KICKED OUT OF THE CHANNEL." (emphasis his) with no explaination at all as to why he went from one extreme to the other. But he did make some bold assertions that should have been explained. so in all honesty what am I to make of his response? they were just insults without explanation.

I guess it helps that I've read the authors book and understand more of the backstory of this scientist and a host of others like her. The author of the book uses original documents that he discovered through his research that showed collusion between industry scientist and government to "sell" the fluoridation program to the public. Along the way he interviewed lots of scientists who study fluoride, showing that there are many shades of grey to this issue. The efficacy and safety of fluoride use in our society is not black and white.
Topical = safe, effective (in proper doses and use)
Systemic = unsafe, noneffective (in doses over the minimum)

this is my first try at embedding a link so i might have to re-edit this post to get it correct

^Sorry, didn't mean to make it seem like I had been poked as I didn't take it that way from you. I figured I'd post the summary and then have a discussion below as we've done multiple times before. But seriously I appreciate your comment, as I'll be looking to avoid needless arguements about copyright and plagarism as I'd rather stick to the topic at hand.

^lots of smoke and mirrors from rembar. hype up and overexaggerate a false claim about me plagarizing when it was a simple oversight that was quickly acknowledged and corrected. Feel free to take a look through any of my posts on fluoride and one would see attributions all over the place. I have no need or desire to claim anothers work for myself. I've already stated why I posted the summary and how the link got left off. As far as I'm concerned the case is closed on that aspect. So you can quit the feigned outrage and shock rembar.

Why on earth would I appease your ego on this subject when you've already stated that it is the equivilent of creationism and intelligent design ?
Insults like that show you are not open minded, so why bother debating you on the specifics?

the short of it is as I've been saying all along. There are scientific studies that have been done by scientist on the subject of fluoride (finding results that you apparently aren't aware of or do not agree with). That does not make them any less scientific (meaning this subject should still be included in the science channel)

simple as that

OMG, I just realized that I had a dream where I plagarized the "guns, lots of guns" line.

In my defence, the dream involved a bear and I was calling 911, requesting police... with "guns, lots of guns."

Wow, that was completely bizarre.