That's easy enough to check. Next time please check first before putting it out in public. If it's not true, it's libel and it could reflect badly on Free Republic.
As I noted in another post, he was not nominated for a Nobel prize through Nobel channels. He was recommended for one, or for a formal nomination if you wish to put it so. It doesn't make the slightest difference to me whether he was nominated or not. That's argumentum ad hominem and a waste of time.
Then what do you think all this bullshit about Michael killing Terri does. It's libelous as well.
As I noted in another post, he was not nominated for a Nobel prize through Nobel channels. He was recommended for one, or for a formal nomination if you wish to put it so. It doesn't make the slightest difference to me whether he was nominated or not.
Asking your congressman to nominate you for an award for which he cant nominate you, doesnt amount to a nomination or a recommendation. It's a scam by a scam artist new age doctor that doesnt spend much time practicing neurology
I appreciate you looking out for my legal well being. Does this help?
http://www.doh.state.fl.us/mqa/FinalOrders/03-17-03/DOH-03-0182.pdf
It doesn't make the slightest difference to me whether he was nominated or not. That's argumentum ad hominem and a waste of time.
You may want to review your Latin. I wasn't attacking you or anyone, simply pointing out that your reference to his nomination probably had no bearing on his qualifications. After all, it seemed to make a difference to you in the post to which I responded. Since his qualifications are the essence of the credibility of his recent statements, questioning those qualifications is hardly argumentum ad hominem.
You don't say!
Good grief...have you noticed the insane posts made on this topic? You are pretty selective when it comes to piping about about potential libel.
You do this all the time. Point after point that you assert gets proven wrong and you simply shrug and say it's not important and you move on to the next faulty supposition.
It is important if he claimed something that was not so. It undermines his credibility and casts doubt (to say the least) on his pronouncements, especially this latest analysis of the autopsy.