reading comprehension is key
I didnt call her a nazi.
The irony of this statement is breathtaking. Let's revisit it in just a moment.
I didnt call her a nazi.
Still digging, are we?
Your original complaint against the article, as per post 5, was that it was "actually using WWII nazi culture as an example."
When I pointed out how ridiculous this was, since the article did absolutely no such thing you responded in post 17 as follows: "in the late 1930s .... by a young German physician, Hilde Bruch” - as if this quote proved your original false accusation.
That's an interesting use of ellipsis, there. What did you leave out? Let's see: "in the late 1930s at Columbia University by a young German physician, Hilde Bruch”.
Now, since the article clearly states that the research took place at Columbia, yet you cite this quote as proof of a Nazi connection this can mean one of several things:
(1) That you were unaware that Columbia University is located in the US.
(2) That your reading comprehension is so poor that you didn't pay attention to where the research was done.
(3) That you automatically assumed that since the research was done by someone born in Germany, it was part of "nazi culture." Which in itself is poor reading comprehension.
The reality is that you read the article sloppily, and because you were sloppy you accused Hilde Bruch of being a Nazi, which she emphatically was not, and you implicitly accused Taubes of relying on Nazi research, which he clearly wasn't.