Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Peter Borger's credentials revealed
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 1 of 34 (18871)
10-02-2002 1:21 PM


Found this at the TalkOrigins feedback site.
Surprising to no one, Our own Peter B. is not what he has claimed to be.
TalkOrigins Archive - Feedback for June 2002
quote:
From: Miguel A. Garcia Comment: A brief comment on a recently published feedback for April, 2002.
The feedback was from a Mr. Borger, who seemed to imply in his post that he was a member of the Science faculty at Sydney University (a prestigous center for higher learning in this country).
The first post to the feedback by Peter B.:
TalkOrigins Archive - Feedback for April 2002
I wish to make clear that Mr. Borger is not now and never has been a member of the science faculty at the University of Sydney.
In fact I rather question the description he uses for himself as a "Molecular Biologist".
Just wanted to set the record straight.
quote:
Response From: Mark Isaak Response: Peter Borger is listed as a Postdoctoral Fellow in the Department of Pharmacology at the University of Sydney. His specialty appears to be respiratory illness, not evolution.
The listing from the University:
http://www.usyd.edu.au/pharmacology/resstaff.html
------------------
"We will still have perfect freedom to hold contrary views of our own, but to simply
close our minds to the knowledge painstakingly accumulated by hundreds of thousands
of scientists over long centuries is to deliberately decide to be ignorant and narrow-
minded."
-Steve Allen, from "Dumbth"

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Joe Meert, posted 10-02-2002 2:11 PM nator has replied
 Message 3 by mark24, posted 10-02-2002 2:20 PM nator has not replied
 Message 5 by peter borger, posted 10-02-2002 7:55 PM nator has replied
 Message 8 by peter borger, posted 10-03-2002 12:24 AM nator has not replied

  
Joe Meert
Member (Idle past 5680 days)
Posts: 913
From: Gainesville
Joined: 03-02-2002


Message 2 of 34 (18874)
10-02-2002 2:11 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by nator
10-02-2002 1:21 PM


[QUOTE] Mark Isaak Response: Peter Borger is listed as a Postdoctoral Fellow in the Department of Pharmacology at the University of Sydney. His specialty appears to be respiratory illness, not evolution.[/B][/QUOTE]
LOL. You just found this out? It's one of the first searches I did. Look at some of my posts where I hinted about his post-doctoral status and his naivete about publishing. Anyway, he never really admitted what his credentials were.
Cheers
Joe Meert

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by nator, posted 10-02-2002 1:21 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by nator, posted 10-02-2002 2:27 PM Joe Meert has not replied
 Message 7 by peter borger, posted 10-02-2002 11:50 PM Joe Meert has replied

  
mark24
Member (Idle past 5195 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 3 of 34 (18876)
10-02-2002 2:20 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by nator
10-02-2002 1:21 PM


quote:
Response From: Mark Isaak Response: Peter Borger is listed as a Postdoctoral Fellow in the Department of Pharmacology at the University of Sydney. His specialty appears to be respiratory illness, not evolution.
Peter,
In that case, I have asthma, I treat the incidences as they occur, with salbutamol (inhaler). I am currently seeking an effective preventer. I have used beclomethasone dipropionate with no noticable results. What are my alternatives?
If my asthma is due to mutated alleles (my sister has it too), what are the chances of getting "directed mutations" to cure my condition? Perhaps I would be better off seeking an effective alternative to beclomethasone dipropionate?
Thanks,
Mark
------------------
Occam's razor is not for shaving with.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by nator, posted 10-02-2002 1:21 PM nator has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by peter borger, posted 10-02-2002 11:25 PM mark24 has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 4 of 34 (18877)
10-02-2002 2:27 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by Joe Meert
10-02-2002 2:11 PM


[QUOTE]Originally posted by Joe Meert:
[B][QUOTE] Mark Isaak Response: Peter Borger is listed as a Postdoctoral Fellow in the Department of Pharmacology at the University of Sydney. His specialty appears to be respiratory illness, not evolution.[/B][/QUOTE]
LOL. You just found this out? It's one of the first searches I did. Look at some of my posts where I hinted about his post-doctoral status and his naivete about publishing. Anyway, he never really admitted what his credentials were.
Cheers
Joe Meert[/B][/QUOTE]
LOL! Yes, I was looking at everything else but the big one.
Well, now he doesn't have to admit anything; they are on the board for all to see.
I am not sure which is worse; his being a PhD and not knowing how science works, or the (now disproved) idea that he wasn't a PhD at all and was just a fairly well-read layperson.
I think the fact that he really has a PhD is worse.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Joe Meert, posted 10-02-2002 2:11 PM Joe Meert has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Syamsu, posted 10-03-2002 6:47 AM nator has not replied

  
peter borger
Member (Idle past 7665 days)
Posts: 965
From: australia
Joined: 07-05-2002


Message 5 of 34 (18912)
10-02-2002 7:55 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by nator
10-02-2002 1:21 PM


Dear Schraf,
At last you found out that I have a PhD --I told you several times before--, and that I was invited to work in Sydney for a while to study transcriptional control of asthma related genes has nothing to do with my postings. So, what exactly is you point? Oyes, I also published on molecular genetics together with Prof Venema from The Netherlands. Like to verify that too?
best wishes,
Peter

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by nator, posted 10-02-2002 1:21 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by nator, posted 10-03-2002 10:47 AM peter borger has replied

  
peter borger
Member (Idle past 7665 days)
Posts: 965
From: australia
Joined: 07-05-2002


Message 6 of 34 (18937)
10-02-2002 11:25 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by mark24
10-02-2002 2:20 PM


dear Mark,
You write,
In that case, I have asthma, I treat the incidences as they occur, with salbutamol (inhaler). I am currently seeking an effective preventer. I have used beclomethasone dipropionate with no noticable results. What are my alternatives?
I say:
Consult your physician and ask for a combined beta-agonist steroid treatment (at least if you are an severe asthmatic). Take care if you use beta-agonist as the only medicxation, since the beta-receptor may become desensitised and thus the drugs do not help anymore. Than, it is always good to have inhalationsteroid at hand. They have a distinct mechanism of action in conparison with beta agonists. However, since you use beclametasone I wouldn't worry about it. It is a well working steroid.
And you say:
If my asthma is due to mutated alleles (my sister has it too), what are the chances of getting "directed mutations" to cure my condition? Perhaps I would be better off seeking an effective alternative to beclomethasone dipropionate
I say:
Probably, if your asthma is IgE associated you have a family history of a mutated IL-4Receptor-alpha 5'-promoter (S478P) and/or IL-13 5'-promoter (-1111) mutation. It runs in several "asthma families" and has been shown to be associated with atopy (=IgE allergy) and asthma. Another possiblity is a promoter polymorphism in the CD14 gene that is involved in recognition of bacterial endotoxins.
Take care,
Peter
[This message has been edited by peter borger, 10-02-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by mark24, posted 10-02-2002 2:20 PM mark24 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by mark24, posted 10-03-2002 7:22 AM peter borger has not replied

  
peter borger
Member (Idle past 7665 days)
Posts: 965
From: australia
Joined: 07-05-2002


Message 7 of 34 (18939)
10-02-2002 11:50 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by Joe Meert
10-02-2002 2:11 PM


dear Professor,
Are you really a professor? (Just kidding)
I wonder though, since I thought this was the evolutionism-versus-creationism-discussion site I was expecting debate and discussion on a high level, not on the level of personal attack. However, after several months I start to find out that if you are not a proponent of evolution --as I am-- even guys with high university degrees do not even know the rules of politeness. In my eyes it is a demonstration of the nihilism that the hype of evolutionism stands for. I feel sorry for a world build on evolutionism and their credo 'survival of the fittest'. If you have any scientific comments, I will be glad to hear.
I wish you well,
Peter

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Joe Meert, posted 10-02-2002 2:11 PM Joe Meert has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Joe Meert, posted 10-03-2002 6:49 AM peter borger has not replied
 Message 12 by derwood, posted 10-03-2002 10:30 AM peter borger has not replied

  
peter borger
Member (Idle past 7665 days)
Posts: 965
From: australia
Joined: 07-05-2002


Message 8 of 34 (18944)
10-03-2002 12:24 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by nator
10-02-2002 1:21 PM


dear Schraf,
Excellent research work, although it doesn't provide any arguments for our little discussion. So, now everyone knows about my background and with regard to my posting to the Talk origin: thanks for that. I didn't see this reponse, yet (maybe I will also get involved in this debate). But, in the meantime I posted my objections to contemporary evolutionism on this site.
You say:
Found this at the TalkOrigins feedback site.
Surprising to no one, Our own Peter B. is not what he has claimed to be.
TalkOrigins Archive - Feedback for June 2002
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Miguel A. Garcia Comment: A brief comment on a recently published feedback for April, 2002.
The feedback was from a Mr. Borger, who seemed to imply in his post that he was a member of the Science faculty at Sydney University (a prestigous center for higher learning in this country).
The first post to the feedback by Peter B.:
TalkOrigins Archive - Feedback for April 2002
I say:
Anybody for the cytochrome c incongruence?
You say:
I wish to make clear that Mr. Borger is not now and never has been a member of the science faculty at the University of Sydney.
I say:
Where did you learn to read? I didn't mention in this letter that I was a member of the Science Faculty. All it says is: University of Sydney. And, yes, I am working for the Department of Pharmacology (University of Sydney), in association with the Royal Prince Alfred (RPA) Hospital and the Institute of Respiratory Medicine (IRM), now known as the 'Woolcock Institute of Medical Research'. Why not call them?
You say:
In fact I rather question the description he uses for himself as a "Molecular Biologist".
I say:
Did you know that lots of molecular biologists, biochemists, etc work in medicine associated laboratoria? As a matter of fact I have a MSc in biology, specialties biochemistry and molecular biology, and I also mentioned that in a letter to you. Better get real, Schraf!
You say:
Just wanted to set the record straight.
I say:
Thanks for that, but next time please do it right and do not misquote.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Response From: Mark Isaak Response: Peter Borger is listed as a Postdoctoral Fellow in the Department of Pharmacology at the University of Sydney. His specialty appears to be respiratory illness, not evolution.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The listing from the University:
http://www.usyd.edu.au/pharmacology/resstaff.html
------------------
I say:
So, I don't have a PhD in evolution and that was also known on this board. So what, I can think for myself, I can read for myself and I am able to draw conclusions myself. And I am able to discriminate between science and non-science. Maybe I should get a PhD in evolutionism, as well.
You conclude:
"We will still have perfect freedom to hold contrary views of our own, but to simply
close our minds to the knowledge painstakingly accumulated by hundreds of thousands
of scientists over long centuries is to deliberately decide to be ignorant and narrow-
minded."
I conclude:
Do you call 50 years of research into the genome long centuries? After 50 years of research usually the first assumed hypotheses are overturned. Dear Schraf, better come up with some real arguments.
Best wishes,
Peter

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by nator, posted 10-02-2002 1:21 PM nator has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by derwood, posted 10-03-2002 12:43 PM peter borger has not replied

  
Syamsu 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5590 days)
Posts: 1914
From: amsterdam
Joined: 05-19-2002


Message 9 of 34 (18969)
10-03-2002 6:47 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by nator
10-02-2002 2:27 PM


Is it really funny to you, or actually quite sad? What are your motives here? Seems this forum is falling into some kind of cheap religious sectarianism recently between atheists / antireligious people and theists. It's worthless.
regards,
Mohammad Nor Syamsu

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by nator, posted 10-02-2002 2:27 PM nator has not replied

  
Joe Meert
Member (Idle past 5680 days)
Posts: 913
From: Gainesville
Joined: 03-02-2002


Message 10 of 34 (18970)
10-03-2002 6:49 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by peter borger
10-02-2002 11:50 PM


quote:
Originally posted by peter borger:
dear Professor,
Are you really a professor? (Just kidding)
I wonder though, since I thought this was the evolutionism-versus-creationism-discussion site I was expecting debate and discussion on a high level, not on the level of personal attack. However, after several months I start to find out that if you are not a proponent of evolution --as I am-- even guys with high university degrees do not even know the rules of politeness. In my eyes it is a demonstration of the nihilism that the hype of evolutionism stands for. I feel sorry for a world build on evolutionism and their credo 'survival of the fittest'. If you have any scientific comments, I will be glad to hear.

JM: Show me the personal attacks. I was laughing because apparently no one else seemed to have taken the time to see if what you were telling us was the truth. To be fair, we have people come on here all the time claiming this credential or that. Usually, they hide those credentials behind a pseudonym (I kind of understand this btw). Like you, I post under my real name and have never had any trouble because of that. As far as my chiding you about publication I must admit that some of your comments struck me as incredibly naive. I could hardly imagine asking a Ph.D. in genetics to find out what journal was best suited for my article on reversals of the magnetic field. YOu could have avoided this by supplying the details upon request. Maybe next time you'll be a little more forthcoming.
Cheers
Joe Meert

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by peter borger, posted 10-02-2002 11:50 PM peter borger has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by nator, posted 10-03-2002 10:59 AM Joe Meert has replied

  
mark24
Member (Idle past 5195 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 11 of 34 (18971)
10-03-2002 7:22 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by peter borger
10-02-2002 11:25 PM


quote:
Originally posted by peter borger:
dear Mark,
You write,
In that case, I have asthma, I treat the incidences as they occur, with salbutamol (inhaler). I am currently seeking an effective preventer. I have used beclomethasone dipropionate with no noticable results. What are my alternatives?
I say:
Consult your physician and ask for a combined beta-agonist steroid treatment (at least if you are an severe asthmatic). Take care if you use beta-agonist as the only medicxation, since the beta-receptor may become desensitised and thus the drugs do not help anymore. Than, it is always good to have inhalationsteroid at hand. They have a distinct mechanism of action in conparison with beta agonists. However, since you use beclametasone I wouldn't worry about it. It is a well working steroid.
And you say:
If my asthma is due to mutated alleles (my sister has it too), what are the chances of getting "directed mutations" to cure my condition? Perhaps I would be better off seeking an effective alternative to beclomethasone dipropionate
I say:
Probably, if your asthma is IgE associated you have a family history of a mutated IL-4Receptor-alpha 5'-promoter (S478P) and/or IL-13 5'-promoter (-1111) mutation. It runs in several "asthma families" and has been shown to be associated with atopy (=IgE allergy) and asthma. Another possiblity is a promoter polymorphism in the CD14 gene that is involved in recognition of bacterial endotoxins.
Take care,
Peter
[This message has been edited by peter borger, 10-02-2002]

Peter,
Thanks for your response, are there any websites that deal with causes of asthma that you woul recommend, to the standard of your reply?
Only myself & my sister have asthma (we both have other allergies too, which lends support to your idea), my brother, at the tender age of 30 is admitting he has hayfever (like sis & I), but has no other allergy. I have a chronic (fairly weell controlled) condition, that is aggravated by pollen, cats etc. My peak flow has been sub 50%, but I have never felt in danger, & oral steroids (I forget which) seem to do the trick. My sister is allergic to far more things than I, but rarely has recourse to use salbutamol. When she gets asthma, she gets acute attacks. She has just been released from an overnight stay in hospital, whereas I have never been admitted. I am interested in why a genetic correlation (if that is what it is) should present so differently? Any thoughts?
As an aside, would someone who has asthma on a daily basis be less likely to panic about an acute attack, meaning they are more likely to end up at their general practitioners, rather than the casualty dept?
Thanks,
Mark
------------------
Occam's razor is not for shaving with.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by peter borger, posted 10-02-2002 11:25 PM peter borger has not replied

  
derwood
Member (Idle past 1876 days)
Posts: 1457
Joined: 12-27-2001


Message 12 of 34 (18980)
10-03-2002 10:30 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by peter borger
10-02-2002 11:50 PM


quote:
Originally posted by peter borger:
I wonder though, since I thought this was the evolutionism-versus-creationism-discussion site I was expecting debate and discussion on a high level, not on the level of personal attack. However, after several months I start to find out that if you are not a proponent of evolution --as I am-- even guys with high university degrees do not even know the rules of politeness. In my eyes it is a demonstration of the nihilism that the hype of evolutionism stands for. I feel sorry for a world build on evolutionism and their credo 'survival of the fittest'.
Please tell us, PhD holdiong molecular genetics scientist, what thye credo "survival of the fittest" actually means as it pertains to evolution.
The answer I predict you will provide will give some insight as to why folks like you tend to get treated the way you do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by peter borger, posted 10-02-2002 11:50 PM peter borger has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by derwood, posted 10-03-2002 10:32 AM derwood has not replied

  
derwood
Member (Idle past 1876 days)
Posts: 1457
Joined: 12-27-2001


Message 13 of 34 (18981)
10-03-2002 10:32 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by derwood
10-03-2002 10:30 AM


Oh - here is an example of why you are not greeted with opened arms:
" Dear supporters of pseudoscience, I was browsing the internet and encountered your Talkorigin site. "....
Then you come here and spew your goo and, darn it, just can't figger out why folks don't give you the benefict of the doubt....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by derwood, posted 10-03-2002 10:30 AM derwood has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 14 of 34 (18988)
10-03-2002 10:47 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by peter borger
10-02-2002 7:55 PM


quote:
Originally posted by peter borger:
Dear Schraf,
At last you found out that I have a PhD --I told you several times before--, and that I was invited to work in Sydney for a while to study transcriptional control of asthma related genes has nothing to do with my postings. So, what exactly is you point? Oyes, I also published on molecular genetics together with Prof Venema from The Netherlands. Like to verify that too?
best wishes,
Peter

Look, you are the one who didn't seem to understand how the journal system works.
You are the one who didn't understand that the position of the foramen magnum in fossil primate skulls indicated how upright the individual walked.
You are the one who has repeatedly cited journal aricles as support for your position when it is clear that the articles do not support your position at all. In fact, you seem to not even read the articles carefully, or at all, before you cite them.
You are the one who thinks that inference doesn't happen in science, when that is precicely how all science is conducted; by making inferences.
Yes, I stand corrected. You do, in fact, have a PhD. However, this fact seems to be irrelevant with regards to your understanding of how science works and of the topics at hand.
You did not mention that you were actually a post doctorate fellow, and I am still mistrustful of your claim that English is not your native language.
If your specialty has been in molecular biology, I can understand how this can be true, as it is possible to do productive molecular work "cookbook-style." The "harder" a science is, the more you rely on your instruments to be the experimental controls. The softer sciences, if they are to be done well, tend to require a greater understanding of science and the pitfalls of fallacies and biased thinking, since human interpretation and perceptions are used much more than machines.
This is why, I think, that the "real" scienctists that get sucked in to pseudoscience tend to be from fields like Physics and engineering. They are terrible at identifying poor experimental design when they are studying humans and human behavior. Bias and thought errors are a part of being human, and the scientific method is there to get around as much of that as possible in our search for the truth about the natural world.
Anyway, I think that you are a religious Creationist, and are therefore going about the problem in the usual backwards way; you have decided what you "know" is true, and now you pick and choose (and willfully misinterpret) the evidence that you feel supports your position and ignore what you can't twist. You also mislead yourself into thinking because you are knowledgeable in one aspect (respiratory illness) you know what you are talking about in other aspects enough to actually think you have overturned the whole of Evolutionary Biology.
Ignorance and Arrogance are so often found together.
Are you sure you aren't an American, because that kind of thing is really common here.
------------------
"We will still have perfect freedom to hold contrary views of our own, but to simply
close our minds to the knowledge painstakingly accumulated by hundreds of thousands
of scientists over long centuries is to deliberately decide to be ignorant and narrow-
minded."
-Steve Allen, from "Dumbth"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by peter borger, posted 10-02-2002 7:55 PM peter borger has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by peter borger, posted 10-03-2002 9:40 PM nator has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 15 of 34 (18990)
10-03-2002 10:59 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by Joe Meert
10-03-2002 6:49 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Joe Meert:
quote:
Originally posted by peter borger:
dear Professor,
Are you really a professor? (Just kidding)
I wonder though, since I thought this was the evolutionism-versus-creationism-discussion site I was expecting debate and discussion on a high level, not on the level of personal attack. However, after several months I start to find out that if you are not a proponent of evolution --as I am-- even guys with high university degrees do not even know the rules of politeness. In my eyes it is a demonstration of the nihilism that the hype of evolutionism stands for. I feel sorry for a world build on evolutionism and their credo 'survival of the fittest'. If you have any scientific comments, I will be glad to hear.

JM: Show me the personal attacks. I was laughing because apparently no one else seemed to have taken the time to see if what you were telling us was the truth. To be fair, we have people come on here all the time claiming this credential or that. Usually, they hide those credentials behind a pseudonym (I kind of understand this btw). Like you, I post under my real name and have never had any trouble because of that. As far as my chiding you about publication I must admit that some of your comments struck me as incredibly naive. I could hardly imagine asking a Ph.D. in genetics to find out what journal was best suited for my article on reversals of the magnetic field. YOu could have avoided this by supplying the details upon request. Maybe next time you'll be a little more forthcoming.
Cheers
Joe Meert

Does anyone know how the requirements for earning a PhD in Australia are different from the requirements in the US?
I know that, in general, the US universities, especially post-graduate work, are more difficult and it is quite a bit more difficult to earn a PhD here than in most other countries. OTOH, our public schools are much easier to graduate from compared to other countries.
So, I suppose that the general populace in Europe and Asia is probably better educated than the general populace of the US, but among people with higher education, those who got their degrees in the US had to work harder to get them than their counterparts on other continents.
I suppose that this would be why many (rich) people in India and Asia and Europe send their children to University in the US.
So, anyway, does anyone know how getting a PhD is different in Australia?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Joe Meert, posted 10-03-2002 6:49 AM Joe Meert has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Joe Meert, posted 10-04-2002 6:42 AM nator has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024