Quote Originally Posted by Bubba
I have to say,

from my perspective as a practicing scientist (we had a mutual friend in the late Bob Moss), that you're coming off

as more of a dogmatist than a scientist.
Perhaps you should contact me privately. Bob Moss once

advised me "you know how it works; present it and write it up." That is, present first, so you get feedback from

peers--before--they tell you what you forgot or didn't know. I presented at the Association for Chemoreception

Sciences, and received nothing but validation for the entire model (circa 2000). I'm sure I could find the

abstract--as they are always published in "Chemical Senses." If others are holding back, I've not seen this. In

fact, I usually get pre-publication copies of what's forthcoming. Once presentation occurs, "everyone" knows where

the work originated--except media reps, of course. The academics I know could care less about getting media credit.



Quote Originally Posted by Bubba
Now this is a much more scientific attitude, reminiscent of this

lesson:
Quote Originally Posted by Bubba
In summary, the idea is to try to give all of the information to help

others to judge the value of your contribution; not just the information that leads to judgment in one particular

direction or another.[/I]
-Richard Feynman
How might a 57-page review article fit into Feynman's

perspective? Might that be enough information to allow others to judge the value of my contribution. Have you read

it? Has anyone on this Forum read it? Or should we consider only what's available directly in this Pheromone Forum,

and judge from that?

JVK
The Scent of Eros