Essence of Alpha Male

[jvkohl]

Those who have

followed my work may wish to note the involvement of the LH receptor. Those who have not can now note that my first

presentation to a scientific forum (in 1992) was: LH: the link between sex and the sense of

smell?

http://stke.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/sigtrans;2007/397/tw272?ct=ct

James

V. Kohl
Author/Creator: The Scent of Eros (SoE)

[TRDE59]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but

doesn't birth control mess with prolactin in girls? Or maybe I'm thinking of something else...

[ShyAsianGuy26]

Birth Control Pills screw

up numerous things and have physiological effects that are still being cataloged. As to your question, I do believe

so because birth control pills operate by stimulating a false pregnancy and prolactin is one of the hormones that

changes in pregnancy.

Hope this helps.

[TRDE59]

So, wouldn't that mess with the

effectiveness of pheromone products?

[ShyAsianGuy26]

The marvelous thing about

science is that you find the answer to one question, but it raises many others as you have demonstrated. As to

whether it will definitively (mess) with pheromone's ability to attract? That I can not say for certain without

experimentation~ Any volunteers?

Prolactin is associated with the repression of dopamine, which as you know is

the chemical/neurotransmitter responsible for sexual pleasure among other things. Males with high amounts

(Hyperprolactinemia Symptoms (http://pherolibrary.com/wiki/Hyperprolactinemia#Symptoms)) experience a

lost of libido and every man's dread... impotence. As to the effect on females... I do believe a side affect of the

pills is that they will be harder arouse, therefore you may conclude that it will hinder the ability of pheromones

to work, if my deduction is correct.

Of course who knows pheromones may stimulate some sort of pathway that we

haven't discovered or perhaps interact with current pathways different... (rambling). I'll still with my previous

conclusion.

[jvkohl]

Of course who knows pheromones may stimulate some sort of pathway that we haven't

discovered or perhaps interact with current pathways different...

(rambling).....

http://www.physorg.com/news107613674.html
University of Maryland

researchers unlock mystery of a third olfactory system
“It allows animals to detect food and determine that

food’s quality, it provides social information like sexual status about other animals, and it can warn an animal

when a predator is present. Because of the great similarities between humans and animals when it comes to the sense

of smell, the more we learn about the building blocks of the system, the more we will learn about how odors affect

our lives.”

James V. Kohl
author/creator: The Scent of Eros

[tenaciousBLADE]

Great question about

the birth control... I too, am very curious to know the answer for that.

[jvkohl]

Birth

Control Pills screw up numerous things and have physiological effects that are still being cataloged. As to your

question, I do believe so because birth control pills operate by stimulating a false pregnancy and prolactin is one

of the hormones that changes in pregnancy.

Hope this helps.

In theory, the relatively static

level of estrogen that is maintained by oral contraceptive disables the cyclic estrogen induced luteinizing hormone

surge that is accompanied by peak monthly testosterone levels in ovulating women, and their peak interest in sex. It

is the cyclic estrogen increase, which is disabled by static estrogen levels, that is most associated with women's

increased olfactory acuity and specificity to the natural body odor of men. Simply put, kill the cycle, and kill the

sex drive of ovulating women, as many studies suggest.

James V. Kohl
author/creator: The Scent of Eros

[tenaciousBLADE]

Ok, the scientific terms

got me slighty confused but I think I might have got it.
So... are you saying that birth control DOES indeed harm

the pheromone products' efficiency?

[CAtriathlete]

Simply put, kill the cycle, and kill the sex drive of ovulating women, as many studies suggest.

James V.

Kohl
author/creator: The Scent of Eros

I know women who have been through menopause who still have

plenty of sex drive. Probably not as much as before, but I wouldn't say it was "killed". I'm guessing there are

also plenty of women who have been through menopause who have no sex drive left. So, the cycle is no doubt linked to

sex drive, but perhaps not the final word?

-CAt

[zatoichi]

I gotta put my 2 cents in here.

I had a GF that was on the pill and her sex drive was too much for me. Everyday sex, I kid you not and when I

couldn't help her she had this little vibrating massager to use on herself. She couldn't get enough. BTW this was

way back without mones so I think the idea she couldn't get pregnant made her feel liberated or she was just a

psycho for sex. I think my girl was maybe a special case. More mental sex drive than hormonal.

Hmm my hormone

studies is a bit dusty... if I am correct the pill is progestrogen which makes the girl develop the muccous membrane

covering the uterus walls at extreme layers preventing the zygote from attaching itself to the walls. since LH is

the opposite of FSH estrogen makes em horny and LH makes em mommies, yeah they would be less sex drive and more

wanting to smell flowers and walk on beaches and take care of loving creatures. And I think I too am correct that in

that state if you suck on their nipples long enough like wks, they will produce milk. I remember hearing it makes

their boobs bigger since I guess the mamari glands are being filled. just the oxitocina( sorry I only remember the

spanish term) is not present to contract the mamaries but I guess with a little help they will secrete milk...wow

hormones are fun!

So from my POV, I see this as maybe a good thing. Since most girl will take pills if they are

already in a relationship, long-term that is. I know many girls do not like taking it but since they are in a

relationship with lots of sex, they don't want to make a mistake so prevent it all together with the pill. So our

mones is only pulling in girls that are not getting much sex and are fertile and horny. Sounds good to me.

[tenaciousBLADE]

Actually, I myself have a

g/f on the pills and everytime we meet she wants & gets sex. We're together for about 2 months and only once have

we met and not made love\sex...
And that was the first time we went to a movie so I wouldn't even count

that.
The `mones dO drive her crazy & she says I opened up a VERY horney & open-minded side of her.
But I'm still

curious to know what the scientific side of it all is... Are the pills (scientificaly) supposed to make it harder on

her to recieve the `mones and be affected by them? :p

[jvkohl]

But

I'm still curious to know what the scientific side of it all is... Are the pills (scientificaly) supposed to make

it harder on her to recieve the `mones and be affected by them? :p

The answer to your question is:

Yes! However, this thread is another example of why I quit posting anything besides research-oriented information.

And here, even when it started with research, discussion took it to individual opinions, which are great for the

individuals to whom they apply, and great for some people who want to discuss opinions. I'll opt out of further

discussion of opinions and continue to pursue the science.

James V. Kohl
author/creator: The Scent of

Eros

[tenaciousBLADE]

Science is great and it

gives the answers we were looking for, but sometimes it helps to add an explenation that is a bit more readable by

people who are somewhat less experienced with the scientific terms. An explenation such as the simple "Yes!" you

just gave.
People should be free to give their own opinions based on their experience - Science is great, but

although it strives to - it is not yet complete :p
Please don't quit giving your own experience. Specially being

it a more profound one in scientific terms ;)
The fact that other people post their own ideas & views doesn't take

back from your replies nor theirs'... Especially taking into account that your product is one of my 3 top favorites

:thumbsup:
Anyway what I'm trying to say is: It wasn't that discussion took it to individual opinions, but rather

that the science was put into a too-sophisticated lenguage (at least in my standarts). That simple yes was - though

quite a sad thing to hear - all the answer I was lacking :D

[terry0400-40]

Science is great and it gives the answers we were looking for, but

sometimes it helps to add an explenation that is a bit more readable by people who are somewhat less experienced

with the scientific terms. An explenation such as the simple "Yes!" you just gave.
People should be free to give

their own opinions based on their experience - Science is great, but although it strives to - it is not yet complete

:p
Please don't quit giving your own experience. Specially being it a more profound one in scientific terms

;)
The fact that other people post their own ideas & views doesn't take back from your replies nor theirs'...

Especially taking into account that your product is one of my 3 top favorites :thumbsup:
Anyway what I'm trying to

say is: It wasn't that discussion took it to individual opinions, but rather that the science was put into a

too-sophisticated lenguage (at least in my standarts). That simple yes was - though quite a sad thing to hear - all

the answer I was lacking :DIve noticed that Essence of Alpha Male has ended

up in the Pheromone Discussion area, so we must therefore assume that is was purposefully placed here to get

attention and feedback comments from all or anyone wishing to contribute their own input regarding the material

posted up as the thread starter.

It would be obvious that if a poster did not wish to communicate in a general and normal

manner with other individuals on the forum with respect to their presentations of opinions posted then they would

have the option of keeping their statements confined to another more suitable area that may facilitate their needs

more adequately.

So it is thankfully appreciated that the God of science has thrown us a crumb of scientific

material, that hopefully we may digest.



And therefore become wise and gain an understanding of the subject which is of

an interest, and also a possable benefit to most of us. :trout: :think:

[tenaciousBLADE]

lol.. nicely and

interestingly put :)

[CAtriathlete]

even

when it started with research, discussion took it to individual opinions, which are great for the individuals to

whom they apply, and great for some people who want to discuss opinions. I'll opt out of further discussion of

opinions and continue to pursue the science.

James V. Kohl
author/creator: The Scent of Eros



James-

I respect you a lot, I am a huge fan of SOE, and your input to this forum has clearly been invaluable

over the years.

Having said that, I must say your response is confusing to me, because it seems dismissive and

self-righteous. I was trained as a scientist too (molecular biology)-- worked at Cold Spring Harbor Lab at one point

in fact. And I think it is absurd to believe that science does not include opinions. Is that what you were trying to

say?

Scientists are some of the most opinionated, arguementative people I've met. There is constant debate in

scientific journals based on opinion. Interpretation of data and results always involves judgment and opinion at

some level. Science is not pure or objective. Science is a human paradigm, and humans are by nature subjective.



And no less so when you are dealing with the effects of chemicals on human behvior. This is anything but

objective. Even randomized, double-blind studies are subject to interpretation. The conclusions of any research are

never fact, but are the opinion of the researcher--theoretically they are based on pure logic, but if that were the

case we wouldn't have so much debate in every field of science.

We could take this into a whole debate over

epistemology (how we know what we know), but actually I don't even think we were giving opinions anyway. We were

describing anecdotal evidence that seems to contradict the science you were sharing, and we were simply asking how

you might explain this anecdotal evidence in light of the research.

The fact is that NOT ALL women lose their

sex drive when they lose their cycle, so we were curious how that fits into the science you are trying to share. I

don't think that is expressing opinion so much as trying to understand how the sophisticated study you were sharing

fits in with other observations.

Respectfully,

-CAt

[terry0400-40]

lol.. nicely and interestingly put :)I only

thought it would be obviously expected that one should receive questions to a post he had posted on a forum of this

nature.

Otherwise the information would have been more suited

to a scientific journal ect........ Eg to be veiwed disected and understood by educated academic and or scientific

minded individuals. :think:

I am thankfull that the Gentleman

does dispense of his valuable time to give us the information that he contributes, but i for one being just a normal

type BUFFOON would have some difficulty in understanding the material and i really appreciate the feedback given

when i see other members asking for clarification on the posted material at times., and this usually leads me to

understand the scientific wording and meanings of the original post. :blink:

[terry0400-40]

Those who have followed my work may wish to note the involvement of the LH

receptor. Those who have not can now note that my first presentation to a scientific forum (in 1992) was: LH: the

link between sex and the sense of smell?



http://stke.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/sigtrans;2007/397/tw272?ct=ct

James V.

Kohl
Author/Creator: The Scent of Eros (SoE)I being an uducated person can

hardly begin to imagion the Intelligence requirement that must have gone in to the creation of Scent of

Eros.

I

would say it must have been a mammoth task in just being able to convince say Stone Labs for example, or whoever, to

go so far out on a limb and actually combine two completly unknown pheromones like Androstenol and Androsterone at a

80% - 20% ratio.

Then the actual mind draining task of finding sutch a beautifull name to compliment the product is

i feel worthy of great applause.

But the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and the society of this great planet Earth has

indeed been blessed by the exceeding brilliance of this great creator.

In conclusion i can only add that we are so

privileged to actually have a being of this magnificient magnitude in our prescence and it is only natural to want

to reach out and touch the hem of his garment in sweet communion.... :box: :box: :box:

[jvkohl]

James-
I think it is absurd to believe that science does not include opinions. Is

that what you were trying to say?-CAt

I specified "individual" opinions, which are based on anecdotal

(i.e., subjective) evidence. In any case, your points are well-taken. At least you know about epistemology. When I

continue to discuss the science, people (see terry0400-40) make comments that I find offensive: "In conclusion i can

only add that we are so privileged to actually have a being of this magnificient magnitude in our prescence and it

is only natural to want to reach out and touch the hem of his garment in sweet communion...."




We could take this into a whole debate over epistemology (how we know what we

know), but actually I don't even think we were giving opinions anyway.

We were describing anecdotal evidence

that seems to contradict the science you were sharing, and we were simply asking how you might explain this

anecdotal evidence in light of the research.-CAt

"Seems to contradict" is the key issue. If people

were more interested in learning about the science, they would find no contradictions--other than in their own

anecdotes. They might then try to scientifically establish why these contradictions exist (in their world, and often

in others).


The fact is that NOT ALL women lose their sex drive when they lose

their cycle, so we were curious how that fits into the science you are trying to share. I don't think that is

expressing opinion so much as trying to understand how the sophisticated study you were sharing fits in with other

observations.-CAt

A woman whose life-long experience with pheromones has conditioned her sexual

response cycle very positively, is not nearly as likely to lose her hormone-dependent sex drive. In fact, due to the

estrogen decline, the effects of testosterone may bee "unmasked" in some cases leading to increased sex drive. But,

as you can probably tell, this is a scientific explanation, not merely an individual opinion based on someone's

anecdotal experience.

And, given the ridicule I've experienced from anonymous members of this Forum, you can

also probably tell why I care less and less about what people think or say--compared to non-anonymous researchers

with whom I regularly correspond. I don't think that is so much an issue of my ego, as it is how I choose to spend

my productive time.

I don't mind spending time responding to comments like yours, but there are too many

people on this Forum who are not the least bit interested in the science of human pheromones.

James V.

Kohl
author/creator: The Scent of Eros

[belgareth]

The there are those of us that

read every scientific post and may ask an occasional question but rarely venture an opinion because we realize we

aren't qualified. Question should always be voiced, even (especially) from us laymen. It helps us better understand

the issues and concepts. Random babble is another thing and I can understand why that would upset any serious

poster.

There are all kinds of people on any public forum. But I think the majority feel they benefit from the

scientific posts, even if we don't feel we know enough to have an opinion.

[Mtnjim]

When I

continue to discuss the science, people (see terry0400-40) make comments that I find offensive: "In conclusion i can

only add that we are so privileged to actually have a being of this magnificient magnitude in our prescence and it

is only natural to want to reach out and touch the hem of his garment in sweet communion...."

James, I

hate to mention this, but, I think Terry was giving you a complement, in his own odd way.:think:

[terry0400-40]

I specified "individual" opinions, which are based on anecdotal (i.e., subjective) evidence.

In any case, your points are well-taken. At least you know about epistemology. When I continue to discuss the

science, people (see terry0400-40) make comments that I find offensive: "In conclusion i can only add that we are so

privileged to actually have a being of this magnificient magnitude in our prescence and it is only natural to want

to reach out and touch the hem of his garment in sweet communion...."



"Seems to contradict" is the key

issue. If people were more interested in learning about the science, they would find no contradictions--other than

in their own anecdotes. They might then try to scientifically establish why these contradictions exist (in their

world, and often in others).



A woman whose life-long experience with pheromones has conditioned her sexual

response cycle very positively, is not nearly as likely to lose her hormone-dependent sex drive. In fact, due to the

estrogen decline, the effects of testosterone may bee "unmasked" in some cases leading to increased sex drive. But,

as you can probably tell, this is a scientific explanation, not merely an individual opinion based on someone's

anecdotal experience.

And, given the ridicule I've experienced from anonymous members of this Forum, you can

also probably tell why I care less and less about what people think or say--compared to non-anonymous researchers

with whom I regularly correspond. I don't think that is so much an issue of my ego, as it is how I choose to spend

my productive time.

I don't mind spending time responding to comments like yours, but there are too many people

on this Forum who are not the least bit interested in the science of human pheromones.

James V.

Kohl
author/creator: The Scent of ErosPLZ dont be offended by me Big Guy

JV , Im just spraying up a little chalk dust talk, And i am one of those who probably are not so interested in the

hard nosed science of Pheromone research, ha ga ga, But i do enjoy the effects of applying a substance and observing

some of the magic that it can add to a scene.



But you are a good bloke i would say,
And you have your way of expressing your self, I amoungst others probably just reacting a little

as we like to see more of you, and probably un be known to us would like to share closer and some warm rapport with

you.

And i

sure can be a stupid headed little ninny sometimes as all can plainly see,
But in heart wish you well with peace and prosperity. in truth. :trout:

[tenaciousBLADE]

First thing's first...


Originally Posted by

Mtnjim:

Quote:
Originally Posted by jvkohl

http://www.pherolibrary.com/forum/image

s/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.pherolibrary.com/forum/showthread.php?p=202608#post202608)
When I continue to discuss the science, people (see terry0400-40) make

comments that I find offensive: "In conclusion i can only add that we are so privileged to actually have a being of

this magnificient magnitude in our prescence and it is only natural to want to reach out and touch the hem of his

garment in sweet communion...."

James, I hate to mention this, but, I think Terry was giving you a

complement, in his own odd way.:think:

I totally agree. In fact I based my own

reply...

Originally Posted by tenaciousBLADE

http://www.pherolibrary.com/forum/image

s/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.pherolibrary.com/forum/showthread.php?p=202589#post202589)
lol.. nicely and interestingly put :)

on that

exact notion. So jvkohl... take it easy :wub: . I'm pretty sure we all here have the fullest respect for

your input. I know I do... furthermore, I look forward to it everytime :thumbsup:

Second...
Science,

at leat such high level science as how pheromones work (and make no mistake of it: I honestly view this type of

science as a very high-level one), is not reachable for anyone and takes a lot of effort to learn & study (you

should know :) ). Some people cannot afford the time\money or patience to actually go and study that science

thoroughly. You said:

Originally Posted by jvkohl

http://www.pherolibrary.com/forum/image

s/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.pherolibrary.com/forum/showthread.php?p=202608#post202608)
If people were more interested in learning about the science, they would find

no contradictions--other than in their own anecdotes. They might then try to scientifically establish why these

contradictions exist (in their world, and often in others).
Some peoples' way of learning about science

such as this particular one, is to read and post in forums such as this. I'm sure you can understand that, right?

:o
Including myself in that group of people, i can say, that we do learn alot from your posts... Yet it may

take some of us some time to realize or fully understand what your answers mean exactly; considering that we do not

have the jargon nor the experience with such complexed and sometimes never-before-heared (through our ears at least)

scientific lingo.

I can only speak for myself, however I don't think anyone here had any intension of insulting

you in any way :o
Granted, sometimes you might sound\seem\feel a little "dismissive and self-righteous"...

because it seems as if you only reply to people with the scentific background... as if the lot of us who hasn't

learned on that specific field has no right to talk with you or earn your respect\experience\answers. But my guess

is that you might think of our replies in the same manner sometimes... and that the fact that we reply in a lingo

that is a bit weak may feel insulting to you. Well please take these next few words not as an insult, but as a

compliment... `coz that is honestly the way I mean them:
Some of us venture our opinions out of curiosity. Science

is not defenent and that is exactly the reason it still exists as a developping proccess... to answer the questions

it raises up, and fill the curiosity of human nature. I can't speak for others yet I'm pretty sure most here would

agree with me (no offense anyone)... I am curious and when I don't understand an answer I keep on asking the

question and try to explain my question a bit more to the detail. The answer wasn't clear to me... up until the

very point you said "Yes". In no way should it be offensieve to you that a simple word was needed.

What I'm

trying to say, jvkohl, is simply (and sincerely):
Don't be offended by our ignorance. Just try to help us

through it instead :D
`Coz honestly... You're one of the most experienced people on the forums, and as such -

you're one we can learn from; but for that to happen you have to let us. So why threat to quit posting, when you

can just teach us some valuable knowledge about your field insted? :rolleyes:

Well, I trully hope I got at

least SOME of the situation right and that my words helped in some way what so ever. `Coz otherwise I've just made

a big fool of myself :run:

JV, people have made some respectable efforts with their words to try and make you

understand that we mean no harm. Please... make that worthwhile and keep on posting your knowledge mate :o
It's

all for a good edjucative pupose :thumbsup:

[terry0400-40]

First thing's first...



I totally agree. In fact I based my own reply...



on that exact notion. So jvkohl... take it easy :wub: . I'm pretty sure we all here have the

fullest respect for your input. I know I do... furthermore, I look forward to it everytime :thumbsup:



Second...
Science, at leat such high level science as how pheromones work (and make no mistake of it: I honestly

view this type of science as a very high-level one), is not reachable for anyone and takes a lot of effort to learn

& study (you should know :) ). Some people cannot afford the time\money or patience to actually go and study that

science thoroughly. You said:

Some peoples' way of learning about science such as this particular one, is to

read and post in forums such as this. I'm sure you can understand that, right? :o
Including myself in that group

of people, i can say, that we do learn alot from your posts... Yet it may take some of us some time to

realize or fully understand what your answers mean exactly; considering that we do not have the jargon nor the

experience with such complexed and sometimes never-before-heared (through our ears at least) scientific lingo.

I

can only speak for myself, however I don't think anyone here had any intension of insulting you in any way

:o
Granted, sometimes you might sound\seem\feel a little "dismissive and self-righteous"... because it seems as

if you only reply to people with the scentific background... as if the lot of us who hasn't learned on that

specific field has no right to talk with you or earn your respect\experience\answers. But my guess is that you

might think of our replies in the same manner sometimes... and that the fact that we reply in a lingo that is a bit

weak may feel insulting to you. Well please take these next few words not as an insult, but as a compliment... `coz

that is honestly the way I mean them:
Some of us venture our opinions out of curiosity. Science is not defenent and

that is exactly the reason it still exists as a developping proccess... to answer the questions it raises up, and

fill the curiosity of human nature. I can't speak for others yet I'm pretty sure most here would agree with me (no

offense anyone)... I am curious and when I don't understand an answer I keep on asking the question and try to

explain my question a bit more to the detail. The answer wasn't clear to me... up until the very point you said

"Yes". In no way should it be offensieve to you that a simple word was needed.

What I'm trying to say,

jvkohl, is simply (and sincerely):
Don't be offended by our ignorance. Just try to help us through it

instead :D
`Coz honestly... You're one of the most experienced people on the forums, and as such - you're one we

can learn from; but for that to happen you have to let us. So why threat to quit posting, when you can just teach us

some valuable knowledge about your field insted? :rolleyes:

Well, I trully hope I got at least SOME of the

situation right and that my words helped in some way what so ever. `Coz otherwise I've just made a big fool of

myself :run:

JV, people have made some respectable efforts with their words to try and make you understand that

we mean no harm. Please... make that worthwhile and keep on posting your knowledge mate :o
It's all for a good

edjucative pupose :thumbsup:I will second what you have said T Blade, i

wouldn't for one minute think you have made a fool of your self in making your sincere comments it just shows us

that you are made up of fine material. good silk nickers type stuff lol,
Oh excuse my stupid puns once again iv started up, i hope not.

Well in all honesty my lack of understanding

of the man within the scientist has caused me to react in a less than pure intent when discussing the Great One, the

Great well Established Icon @ Love- Scent, And i have exibited an amount of cheeky

banter.

But

when i had discovered to my suprise that the Great One had actually read and commented on my post, that even may

have ruffled some of his tail feathers a tad,
His human reaction

had a really softening and humbling effect upon me where i did really feel compassion within my self for him as a

human being, the one within the scientist. :blink:

[jvkohl]

I'm

pretty sure we all here have the fullest respect for your input. I know I do... furthermore, I look forward to it

everytime

Thanks, but you must have missed the thread that caused me to drop out of most general

discussion. Here's what Bruce had to say about my

input.
http://www.pherolibrary.com/forum/showpost.php?p=197546&postcount=38

When the anonymous

Bubba was pronounced the superior scientist, I found a different Forum where my "hard" scientific approach was

better accepted than the "soft" social science of others, like Bubba, who contribute here. It's great when people

don't misinterpret my comments and when I don't misinterpret theirs--but as we all know--it happens. I'm glad you

took the time to help explain why it happens.

James V. Kohl
author/creator: The Scent of Eros

[belgareth]

There was a lot more to that

discussion and that one post, taken out of context, is unfair to everybody. If anybody would like to know more,

please read the entire thread: http://www.pherolibrary.com/forum/showthread.php?p=197546#post197546

[tenaciousBLADE]

Thanks - I was wondering

how to get there, and I did get to think to myself "ok... but why did he only sned me that one post?"

[jvkohl]

There was a

lot more to that discussion and that one post, taken out of context, is unfair to everybody.

Sorry,

belgareth. I tried to place Bruce's post in the context of "hard" science, like neuroscience, compared to "soft"

science, like social psychology. Different branches of science have different philosophical approaches.



James V. Kohl

[jvkohl]

Different

branches of science have different philosophical approaches.

I am far less critical of the soft

science approach than others, and am not advocating that any contributer to this Forum become a shoe salesperson. On

the other hand, I do not wish to engage them in debate about my ego after they have repeatedly commented negatively

on my hard science approach.

“Since the null hypothesis refutation racket is “steady work” and has the

merits of an automated research grinding device, scholars who are pardonably devoted to making more money and

keeping their jobs so that they can pay off the mortgage and buy hamburgers for the wife and kids are unlikely to

contemplate with equanimity a criticism that says that their whole procedure is scientifically feckless and that

they should quit doing it and do something else. In the soft areas of psychology that might, in some cases, mean

that they should quit the academy and make an honest living selling shoes, which people of bookish temperament

naturally do not want to do.”

Full text

at:
http://www.tc.umn.edu/~pemeehl/144WhySummaries.pdf

PE Meehl has other works that attest to

the number of doctoral students he has taught, and that no one ever told him--even anonymously--that they thought

his ego was the problem.

James V. Kohl
author/creator: The Scent of Eros

[tenaciousBLADE]

Well I've written a long reply, but decided not to post it after all:think:


JVkohl, take it easy. We're all individuals and as far as I know we're not against you, and we appritiate

your cotribute to the forums.
You want to threaten to quit giving your opinions - feel free it's your own choice

(I'd rather you won't but I'll fight for your right to do so).
But by all means - let everybody else say

theirs'. Nobody's here to hurt you :o
Misunderstandings do happen - but they can be fixed by a simple, polite

explenation. You did such explaning yourself on this thread for example, by saying "Yes". No need to get

offended:angel:

[tenaciousBLADE]

Posted the last post

before I saw you two last replies.
I myself quote a whole lot... but quoting doesn't explain your point as well as

your own explenations might.
I remain saying what I just said above: relax a bit... take it easy :o

[jvkohl]

Nobody's here to hurt you

Minimally, there is one person here who has done his best to contribute a

series of defamatory statements about me both in this forum and in another similar forum. For

example:



Mr. Kohl, is trained only as a hospital lab technician,... He has never

designed and conducted a study, and has no training in research or statistics whatsoever, much less the social

sciences. (... calling himself a "researcher" is a bit sketchy, by formal standards. And processing blood samples or

whatever in a hospital does not make you a "clinical laboratory scientist", like he claims. It makes you a lab tech,

period. It's not ethically OK to say that in the sciences. These are terms reserved for people who conduct studies

and have an advanced degree.)

---------------------------------
Excerpts from my response:
I

will stand by my introduction [on the other forum] and thank others for welcoming me.... More recently, I posted

that I received an award for the author(s) of the best social science article, chapter, or book published during the

previous year....

You can verify my Clinical Laboratory Scientist credentials via links from my introduction:

either to the National Credentialing Agency for Laboratory Personnel, or to the American Society for Clinical

Laboratory Science, You can verify my use of "Researcher" by examining the membership requirements for the Society

for Neuroscience. "All applicants... must be sponsored by two regular or emeritus members of the Society and must

submit a curriculum vitae and bibliography with the application form." Sponsors attest that applicants have made a

significant contribution to the field (e.g., via research).

I helped to design several research studies. A

student researcher and I presented the most recent research results in April 2007 at the Association for

Chemoreception Sciences annual meeting.

Discussions would be easier for me if defamatory comments about my

credentials and expertise were either not anonymously made, or not made at

all.
------------------------------------------------

I've haven't heard anything from DrSmellThis since

I refuted each one of his defamatory comments, with evidence that is available to anyone who wants to look at it. I

chose to quote Meehl, rather than use my own words, to exemplify that training in research or statistics like social

scientists receive may be meaningless here, despite their emphasis by DrSmellThis. The award I received for "the

best social science article... published during the previous year" is an example of what happens when you don't

allow others either to direct you, or to deter you from research you think is important. Academics are often

directed and detered by their professors and by other academics, which brings me back to Meehl's comment about shoe

sales.

James V. Kohl
author/creator: The Scent of Eros

[tenaciousBLADE]

With all that said JVK,

and with all due respect... You are generalizing what you claim to be HIS opinion on you (or agenda... i.e. "wanting

to hurt you")... on everybody else on the forum. you come from a starting premise that we are ALL here to hurt you.

Or you at least seem to doubt each one of us before you trust. Instead of coming up with such a mean rude attitude,

you could simply come with the starting assumption that most of us DIDN'T come here to hurt you. Doing otherwise,

would be (and is) disrespectful to us as mear human beings.

Just take it easy man.

This will be my

last comment on this. So feel free to leash out if you feel the need for it :\

[jvkohl]

With

all that said JVK, and with all due respect... You are generalizing what you claim to be HIS opinion on you (or

agenda... i.e. "wanting to hurt you")... on everybody else on the forum. you come from a starting premise that we

are ALL here to hurt you. Or you at least seem to doubt each one of us before you trust.

With

Bubba's support, DrSmellThis sufficiently managed to force me out of this forum for a while, because my responses

were limited by the moderators, at Bruce's suggestion. With enough support from participants like you (there was

some support at the time), I might not have dropped out at all. At the point that most of my posts were censured by

the moderators, Forum members were only getting half the picture. I'm surprised that I've been able to tell the

rest of the story in this thread. It takes very little for a few vocal participants to gain control of what is

allowed to be seen on any Forum. My comments are not meant to implicate the majority of Forum members, who come here

for information and to compare notes.


Instead of coming up with such a mean rude

attitude, you could simply come with the starting assumption that most of us DIDN'T come here to hurt you. Doing

otherwise, would be (and is) disrespectful to us as mear human beings.

I apologize for being

either mean, or rude; that was not my intent.


Just take it easy

man.

I will. Thanks.

James V. Kohl
author/creator: The Scent of Eros

[idesign]

With

Bubba's support, DrSmellThis sufficiently managed to force me out of this forum for a while, because my responses

were limited by the moderators, at Bruce's suggestion. With enough support from participants like you (there was

some support at the time), I might not have dropped out at all. At the point that most of my posts were censured by

the moderators, Forum members were only getting half the picture. I'm surprised that I've been able to tell the

rest of the story in this thread. It takes very little for a few vocal participants to gain control of what is

allowed to be seen on any Forum. My comments are not meant to implicate the majority of Forum members, who come here

for information and to compare notes.



I'm very curious now. What information was disallowed? Why

do you think you were censured?

[terry0400-40]

IMHO The Man JVK is an individual who is plain and simply who and what he is, I

personally dont doubt his credability especially now that i have been brought to focus on the Gentleman in the last

few weeks,

He has his own unique and individual style as a human product of his science and all factors

considered he is contributing to the forum and imparting wisdom and reports as well as his own opinions and

studies,



and i am thankful that he is hanging around and just being who he is and thats all anyone can really

do.

Maby we

have had enough of disecting and scrutenising the poor guy.

I recon we all should reconsile our

differences and move on whilst life is short and sweet.

I for one will try and not be sutch a shit

stirrer, And seeing as i am one of the least amoungst yous all will save my venom for any spammers that creep on to

the forum BLAM BLAM to our real Enemies :rasp:

[idesign]

IMHO The Man JVK is an individual who is plain and

simply who and what he is, I personally dont doubt his credability especially now that i have been brought to focus

on the Gentleman in the last few weeks,

He has his own unique

and individual style as a human product of his science and all factors considered he is contributing to the forum

and imparting wisdom and reports as well as his own opinions and studies,

and i am thankful that he is hanging around and just being who he is and thats all anyone can

really do.

Maby we have had enough of disecting and

scrutenising the poor guy.

I recon we all should reconsile our

differences and move on whilst life is short and sweet.

I for

one will try and not be sutch a shit stirrer, And seeing as i am one of the least amoungst yous all will save my

venom for any spammers that creep on to the forum BLAM BLAM to our real Enemies :rasp:

I

agree with you Terry, and I try to follow the same guidelines of good behavior. I have no differences with anyone

here. Certainly not with JVK, who is the only manufacturer who posts here, and creator of a product which has much

respect from me and many others.

I've not been a party to whatever "conflict" that may be occurring, and I'm

not trying to stir anything, I'm just genuinely curious about JVK's comments, and perceptions of his treatment on

this forum since I wasn't around during the time in question.

I follow his posts with deference to his training,

knowledge and experience.

Cheers mate,
Greg

To JVK, my question was meant purely as an honest question

because I'm curious. I don't know any of the background of your difficulties in the past vis a vis this forum,

hence my curiosity. As for the current "conflict", I'm not interested. I completely understand your

disinclination to engage opinion where scientific matters are concerned. And, BTW, thanks for such a great

product.

Most sincerely,
Greg

[jvkohl]

I'm very

curious now. What information was disallowed? Why do you think you were censured?

I discussed the

censured posts with one of the moderators and with Bruce in January 2007, and decided to post only to the "Pheromone

Research" section.

It is better designed for scientific purposes, like mine. No need to rehash this here.

It's the Love-Scent Forum; not my forum.

I have a popular domain where I can post whatever I like, but it's

harder for me to update regularly. So, my posts to the "Pheromone Research" section are a matter of convenience, and

they have helped me to avoid additional conflict here.

DrSmellThis made some defamatory comments on another

Forum, and linked back to the Love-Scent thread for support of his defamatory comments. He led me to look at posts

that had gone from "Pheromone Research" to more general discussion, which brought me here. I'm not planning on any

more debate, which is why I posted the comments DrSmellThis made and my response to them. I don't have time to

debate either the "soft" science approach, or discuss the "soft" science comments with anonymous posters. I try to

make time to discuss my "hard" science approach with anyone, anonymous or not, who wants to learn more about it.



James V. Kohl
author: The Scent of Eros and The Mind's Eyes
creator: The Scent of Eros

pheromone-enhanced products

[jvkohl]

He has his own unique and individual style as a human product of his science and all

factors considered he is contributing to the forum and imparting wisdom and reports as well as his own opinions and

studies

Maby we have had enough of disecting and scrutenising the poor guy.

Well said! My

style is best suited for discussing facts, and usually this is with other "hard" scientists. Some have an ego that

limits discussion of their opinions; most do not. But no researcher I know has an ego that limits their discussion

of "hard" scientific facts, as I have recently been asked to do in conjunction with an award. (Award notice

below):
---
James V. Kohl has been selected to receive the Ira and Harriet Reiss Theory Award for 2007 from

the Foundation for the Scientific Study of Sexuality (FSSS). The award is given annually for the best social science

article, chapter, or book published in the previous year in which theoretical explanations of human sexual attitudes

and behaviors are developed. Kohl's review: "The Mind's Eyes: Human Pheromones, Neuroscience, and Male Sexual

Preferences" was published in the Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, 18(4): 313-369, and concurrently

published as a book chapter in the "Handbook of the Evolution of Human Sexuality." In conjunction with the award,

Kohl is an invited plenary session speaker at the annual meeting of the Society for the Scientific Study of

Sexuality (SSSS) in November, 2007, which will be held in Indianapolis, Indiana.
---
Some of you know about

the award I received for my 2001 invited review that linked neuroscience and ethology. This latest award crosses

from neuroscientific ("hard") science into social ("soft") science, and helps to extend my sphere of influence to

the soft sciences. Nevertheless, I have never pretended to understand much about the soft sciences.

James V.

Kohl
author/creator: The Scent of Eros

[jvkohl]

I agree with

you Terry, and I try to follow the same guidelines of good behavior. I have no differences with anyone here.

Certainly not with JVK, who is the only manufacturer who posts here, and creator of a product which has much respect

from me and many others.

Thanks. However, DrSmellThis and Archtypical Hybrid (HEC) are among other

manufacturers who have posted here, which may help to explain some of our differences.





To JVK, my question was meant purely as an honest question because I'm curious.

I don't know any of the background of your difficulties in the past vis a vis this forum, hence my curiosity. As

for the current "conflict", I'm not interested. I completely understand your disinclination to engage opinion

where scientific matters are concerned. And, BTW, thanks for such a great product.

Thanks again. I

responded to your post because it was made out of curiousity, and not meant to cause conflict.

James V.

Kohl
author/creator: The Scent of Eros

[idesign]

I discussed

the censured posts with one of the moderators and with Bruce in January 2007, and decided to post only to the

"Pheromone Research" section.

It is better designed for scientific purposes, like mine. No need to rehash this

here. It's the Love-Scent Forum; not my forum.

I have a popular domain where I can post whatever I like, but

it's harder for me to update regularly. So, my posts to the "Pheromone Research" section are a matter of

convenience, and they have helped me to avoid additional conflict here.

DrSmellThis made some defamatory comments

on another Forum, and linked back to the Love-Scent thread for support of his defamatory comments. He led me to look

at posts that had gone from "Pheromone Research" to more general discussion, which brought me here. I'm not

planning on any more debate, which is why I posted the comments DrSmellThis made and my response to them. I don't

have time to debate either the "soft" science approach, or discuss the "soft" science comments with anonymous

posters. I try to make time to discuss my "hard" science approach with anyone, anonymous or not, who wants to learn

more about it.

James V. Kohl
author: The Scent of Eros and The Mind's Eyes
creator: The Scent of Eros

pheromone-enhanced products

Thanks for replying JVK, I think I'm beginning to understand your

predicament. Science, business and politics make strange bedfellows.

Opinion is the playground of both the

knowledgeable and the ignorant. Sometimes its hard to tell which is which. An objective view requires a lot of due

diligence.

I follow your posts from a place of scientific ignorance, and admit it freely, but I do read

extensively to learn and understand.

In your field there is a fine line between biological and social function.

You're examining the science of pheromonal effect and, sure, there is a huge social aspect. But is seems to me

that scientific discovery is more than observation of behavior, which is all that social scientists can claim,

imprtant as it is. Its good to see that you're crossing over.

I do hope that you'll keep posting here. If I

ever reach the point of sufficient understanding I might even ask a relevant question!

Greg

[tenaciousBLADE]

A few things JVK (most important is saved for last)...


(My emphasize...)



1)

I discussed the censured posts with one of the moderators and with Bruce in January 2007,

and decided to post only to the "Pheromone Research" section.

It is better designed for

scientific purposes, like mine. No need to rehash this here. It's the Love-Scent Forum; not my

forum.

I have a popular domain where I can post whatever I like, but it's harder for me to update regularly.

So, my posts to the "Pheromone Research" section are a matter of convenience, and they have helped me to avoid

additional conflict here.

DrSmellThis made some defamatory comments on another Forum, and linked back to

the Love-Scent thread for support of his defamatory comments. He led me to look at posts that had gone from

"Pheromone Research" to more general discussion, which brought me here. I'm not planning on any more

debate, which is why I posted the comments DrSmellThis made and my response to them. I don't

have time to debate either the "soft" science approach, or discuss the "soft" science comments with anonymous

posters. I try to make time to discuss my "hard" science approach with anyone, anonymous or not, who wants to learn

more about it.

James V. Kohl
author: The Scent of Eros and The Mind's Eyes
creator: The Scent of Eros

pheromone-enhanced products

Well said.
And I thank you for putting it clearly and politely this time

around. I think I may finally understand what you ment when saying you quit that style of posing on this

forum. If I understand correctly, you mearly ment to respect the forum and it's owners\moderators in your own way.

That I can definitely encourage.

Just FYI: I did notice there was some information censured on

that specific thread (http://www.pherolibrary.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17357), the moment I saw this post



Mtnjim, Bubba mentioned professional background - see post# 48. Not that I think it matters -

post # 61.and realized that replys #48 & #61 are not even present at the thread anymore :think:
Yet, I

realized it is the forum-moderator's\owner's right to decide to sometimes censure a thread, and did not (& still

don't) have any intention of arguing nor disreguarding their choise\right.
And I am happy you made the same

decision (as you seem to have made).

and about "I'm not planning on any more debate" - I understand

where you come from on this and am actually very glad to see you're taking the same mature stand as Bruce adviced.

I hope you've decided that by your own free will, and I see the intelligence in that decision.

Much better

attitude than before - and honestly much better put. I thank you for that :thumbsup:



2)
I respect your

style - as long as you respect other's styles too (Hope I have the right grammer hehe :o).
With these last few

posts - You seem to have made a great progress in terms of showing your respect for the styles of others (IMO -

including Bruce... which is nice:angel: ). I hope I'm not the only one who sees that; and amongst the ones I hope

who see that too - is also yourself :cheers:



3)



I agree

with you Terry, and I try to follow the same guidelines of good behavior. I have no differences with anyone here.

Certainly not with JVK, who is the only manufacturer who posts here, and creator of a product which

has much respect from me and many others.

Thanks. However, DrSmellThis and Archtypical Hybrid (HEC)

are among other manufacturers who have posted here, which may help to explain some of our differences.



Personaly, I see this as (and hope it is) an acknowledgement of the " " " " "authority" " " " of those

two individual personas mentioned in this quote above [notice that the gross word "authority" is only used

here for me lacking a better word:box: :angel: I do not intent to mock anyone by using it]. JVK

clearly made a stand to prevent discrediting their obviously present scientific background on the field.
This again

is an improvement which I welcome with open arms. Bruce, I think there's a very positive breakthrough here and we

should welcome it as long as we have that oportunity :cheers: (hope you're reading, rather than me just talking to

the air hehe:lol: ).

...
4)


which may help to

explain some of our differences.

I think my emphasiz here makes my little additional point clear.



5)
For me personally, this is the most important part of my reply, which is why i saved it for

last.
...




With all that said JVK, and with all due

respect... You are generalizing what you claim to be HIS opinion on you (or agenda... i.e. "wanting to hurt you")...

on everybody else on the forum. you come from a starting premise that we are ALL here to hurt you. Or you at least

seem to doubt each one of us before you trust.

With Bubba's support, DrSmellThis

sufficiently managed to force me out of this forum for a while, because my responses were limited by the moderators,

at Bruce's suggestion. With enough support from participants like you (there was some support at the time), I might

not have dropped out at all. At the point that most of my posts were censured by the moderators, Forum members were

only getting half the picture. I'm surprised that I've been able to tell the rest of the story in this thread. It

takes very little for a few vocal participants to gain control of what is allowed to be seen on any Forum. My

comments are not meant to implicate the majority of Forum members, who come here for information and to compare

notes.



Instead of coming up with such a mean rude attitude, you could

simply come with the starting assumption that most of us DIDN'T come here to hurt you. Doing otherwise, would be

(and is) disrespectful to us as mear human beings.


I apologize for being either mean, or

rude; that was not my intent.



Just take it easy man.


I will.

Thanks.

James V. Kohl
author/creator: The Scent of Eros
Sincerely JVK - I'm satisfied. That is all I

asked for. I thank you for taking the time & effort to come down to my point; and for simply mentioning that you had

no intent of being rude. I have the best of hope and I believe that you will probably pay better attention from now

on, to the fact that the readers on this forums are each his\her own individuals, and that you'll show more

specified attention when reguarding specific people (I'm not saying your attention was never specifed though :) -

don't get me wrong :D).

6)
I think we can be assured that the freedom given in these forums has been of great

service on this specific thread. And I personally would like to thank the moderators who have probably dealt with

some though questions during this long thread.
I wouldn't like to be in that position lol - yet I think you made a

great job here :thumbsup: (from my humble perspective, that is).

P.S.
I would actually like to see Bubba

being active in the forums; But in no way am I condoning or welcoming further confrontation with such face to face

street fights (If I may call them so... maybe I may not :think: :o).
I think misunderstandings can be solved with

mutual effort. So if there ever would be another such misunderstanding - all it takes is for both sides to wanna get

along with each other and hear each other out rather than try to prove their own side up until the final-round

:rasp: :POKE:
With that said, I do think that Bubba was intersting and it even might be possible for him to get

along qith all of us (including JVK).
But then again - that's only my inoccent opinion :o:angel:

Moderators -

feel free to delete my P.S. message if you see fit. I won't take it personaly :lovestruc

[tenaciousBLADE]

Thanks for replying JVK, I think I'm beginning to understand your predicament. Science,

business and politics make strange bedfellows.

Opinion is the playground of both the knowledgeable and the

ignorant. Sometimes its hard to tell which is which. An objective view requires a lot of due diligence.

I follow

your posts from a place of scientific ignorance, and admit it freely, but I do read extensively to learn and

understand.

In your field there is a fine line between biological and social function. You're examining the

science of pheromonal effect and, sure, there is a huge social aspect. But is seems to me that scientific discovery

is more than observation of behavior, which is all that social scientists can claim, imprtant as it is. Its good to

see that you're crossing over.

I do hope that you'll keep posting here. If I ever reach the point of

sufficient understanding I might even ask a relevant question!

Greg

LOL I love the attitude Greg!

:thumbsup:

[jvkohl]

In your

field there is a fine line between biological and social function. You're examining the science of pheromonal

effect and, sure, there is a huge social aspect. But is seems to me that scientific discovery is more than

observation of behavior, which is all that social scientists can claim, imprtant as it is. Its good to see that

you're crossing over.

I do hope that you'll keep posting here. If I ever reach the point of sufficient

understanding I might even ask a relevant question!

Greg,

Relevant or not, I will try to

answer all questions. I'm happy that you understand what "crossing over" entails. I've had more than 10 years of

intermittent debate with a prominent ethologist who finally made clear to me that his version of scientific

discovery started with the observation of behavior--and so mine must also start with observation of behavior. Forget

mammalian models of behavior; forget neuroscience, forget everything that ethologists don't examine (or

understand)--and examine only the behavior to find its cause. Then, also predict null hypothesis refutation (i.e.,

that you can prove the behavior is not caused by something else).

Since the behavior is observed visually,

most people think that the cause should/must be a visual cue. Thus, we have a generation of researchers in different

disciplines who follow early ethologists teachings from the 50's and who also fail to recognize the importance of

unseen olfactory/pheromonal cues, which are the biological basis for mammalian sexual behavior. These same

researchers fail to make the connection between human pheromones and proof of their effect on hormones and their

affect on human sexual behavior.

Your comment cuts to the core of my conflict with those who think that

observing behavior is sufficient to explain it.

-------------for example-----------
Smell this; if you

like it; it explains why you approach the person who's wearing it, and it has something to do with your life's

narrative.
-----------------------------------

It's nice to see that you understand why such comments

(above) might goad me to respond in a manner that many might think inappropriate. Neuroscientists would laugh most

ethologists out of the auditorium. Minimally, I would argue that ethologists might have missed something, and have

thereby applied a non-sensical approach to any interpretation of data they think is relevant to the study of human

sexuality.

Your relevant comment is more important to me than most relevant questions at this

point.

Thank you,

James V. Kohl
author/creator: The Scent of Eros

[jvkohl]

Sincerely JVK - I'm satisfied. That is all I asked for. I thank you for taking

the time & effort to come down to my point; and for simply mentioning that you had no intent of being

rude.

You're welcome. I've learned the difference between intending to be rude and the perception

of being rude. It's the perception that counts, not the intent.



P.S.
I

would actually like to see Bubba being active in the forums; But in no way am I condoning or welcoming

further confrontation....
I think misunderstandings can be solved with mutual effort. So if there ever would be

another such misunderstanding - all it takes is for both sides to wanna get along with each other and hear each

other out rather than try to prove their own side up until the final-round :rasp: :POKE:
With that said, I do

think that Bubba was intersting and it even might be possible for him to get along qith all of us (including

JVK).
But then again - that's only my inoccent opinion :o:angel:

I'm less innocent. As I

mentioned in my response to Greg, I've gone round and round for years with people who want to tell me how science

should/must be done. If I had ever followed their dictates, I could not have made any scientific progress in the

study of human pheromones. Bubba reminded me of those who hinder progress, but also challenge the methods of people

making the progress, only to dissappear into their anonymity.

James V. Kohl

[tenaciousBLADE]

only to dissappear into their anonymity.


Yeah, it was that anonymity which I was refering to; saying

that if he will be more active, maybe we can actually see him as a member of the forum and not as a visitor.
I

remain inoccent though ;)

[jvkohl]

Yeah,

it was that anonymity which I was refering to; saying that if he will be more active, maybe we can actually see him

as a member of the forum and not as a visitor.

As I recall, he said he was a sensory scientist

working a few fields away from olfaction. I was reminded of how perspectives can be skewed by not being involved in

olfactory/pheromonal research when I received a reprint today.

Rapid Neuroendocrine Responses to Auditory

Courtship Signals
Donna L. Maney, Christopher T. Goode, Jessica I. Lake, Henry S. Lange, and Sara O'Brien

Endocrinology. published 6 September 2007, 10.1210/en.2007-0879


http://endo.endojournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/en.2007-0879v1? ct=ct

The neuroendocrine

response that is reported to occur with auditory courtship signals is the same that occurs in response to

olfactory/pheromonal input in mammals, including humans. Yet. because they are studying auditory signals in birds,

there is no reason to look for the involvement of pheromones, and no explanation for why the same response occurs

with exposure to auditory signals. I've seen the same type of thing reported by many people who study avian

species, and who are as yet unaware that even birds produce and respond to pheromones.

For example: Francesco

Bonadonna, Eve Miguel, Vladimir Grosbois, Pierre Jouventin, Jean-Marie Bessiere, 2007. Individual odor recognition

in birds: an endogenous olfactory signature on petrels' feathers? Jour. Chemical Ecology. In Press.

If a

researcher is not aware of what's happening outside his/her discipline, or even with other species, they are

limited to explanations that fit some species (e.g., songbirds), but that are not a consistent fit across species.

So, their research continues to provide no explanation for the response they observe. It's a best guess scenario.

that leads to more and more research, but not meaningful results--at least if you expect them to have meaning to

human sexual behavior. That's one reason PE Meehl was adamant that these researchers simply stop what they are

doing, which is contrasted by Fenyman's encouragment (noted by Bubba) to continue doing the same thing.

One

definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over while expecting a different result. If Bubba had been

any more specific, I might have been able to comment on problems he might be having with progress to explanations of

his findings. Instead, he was vague enough to criticize my approach, without providing a means to compare our

approaches. His criticisms of my attitude might best have been met with criticisms of his model--if he has a model,

which we may never know. If so, I must consider the entire debate a waste of my time, which is why I should never

enter debate with anonymous posters. Discussion is fine, debate is pointless unless there is some means to compare

the insane nature of some research.

James V. Kohl
author/creator: The Scent of Eros

[idesign]

As I

recall, he said he was a sensory scientist working a few fields away from olfaction. I was reminded of how

perspectives can be skewed by not being involved in olfactory/pheromonal research when I received a reprint today.



Yet. because they are studying auditory signals in birds, there is no reason to look for the involvement of

pheromones, and no explanation for why the same response occurs with exposure to auditory signals. I've seen the

same type of thing reported by many people who study avian species, and who are as yet unaware that even birds

produce and respond to pheromones.

If a researcher is not aware of what's happening outside his/her discipline,

or even with other species, they are limited to explanations that fit some species (e.g., songbirds), but that are

not a consistent fit across species. So, their research continues to provide no explanation for the response they

observe. It's a best guess scenario. that leads to more and more research, but not meaningful results--at least if

you expect them to have meaning to human sexual behavior. That's one reason PE Meehl was adamant that these

researchers simply stop what they are doing, which is contrasted by Fenyman's encouragment (noted by Bubba) to

continue doing the same thing.

One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over while expecting a

different result.

Discussion is fine, debate is pointless unless there is some means to compare the insane

nature of some research.

James V. Kohl
author/creator: The Scent of Eros

Reminds me of a line in the

movie Ghostbusters. Dan Ackroyd to Bill Murray after they were booted from the university research post:

"You

don't understand, Venkman, I've worked in the private sector, they expect results."

[tenaciousBLADE]

lol.
What a nice referal idesign :LOL:

Well, I see your point JVK. But he wasn't trying to

debate.. although he WAS debating. I think he was just trying to make you see his point whether or not it's

valid.
By simply acknowledging he has a point and you understand what it is, you might have been able to

evade the so called waste of your time and the clearly stormy means used in that debate.

What I am saying is

that attitude may sometimes change the result of our actions even if the action remains the same. And that was

somewhat integrated in Bubba's main point... which is why I still have some respect for what he was trying to

do.
I agree that he gave you no means of explaning yourself and took you around the boosh (in a brilliant manner if

I might add - you gotta respect his smarts even when used like that); but he didn't seem to be aware of the need

for a debate to be mutual in terms of comparison. I don't think he was reaching for a debate... I think he was

simply reaching for you to show you respect the forum users and for you to pay more attension than what he thought

you were paying, to being subjective.

But then again, this is only an hypothesis... and there's no actual

reason to keep grinding this issue is there? :o:think: :o
Yeah I'm probably just grinding water here...
Which

means we both are wasting time with this haha :trout:

Well... Bottom line, I see where you're coming from, and

I think in a way things are better now :angel:

[jvkohl]

Well, I see your point JVK. But he wasn't trying to debate.. although he WAS

debating. I think he was just trying to make you see his point whether or not it's valid.
By simply

acknowledging he has a point and you understand what it is, you might have been able to evade the so called

waste of your time and the clearly stormy means used in that debate.

He quoted Richard Feynman and

others jumped on his scientific bandwagon. I could have quoted PE Meehl or historical reviews from Marler to

contrast his "soft" science quote. Debate is best when we keep it about our own opinions and scientific debate is

best when we keep it about our own works. That's what fails when other researchers prefer Forum anonymity; they're

not debating their own opinions or research. They are debating only what they've been taught to believe, and

supporting their debate by referencing their teachers. Since I am unlikely to teach them anything (no mention that

they've read my works, or even know what I'm talking about), any of my comments can readily be considered appeals

to authority, and therein lies the problem. When my responsive appeals to authority (e.g., my own) are chastised,

it's my ego that's called to question--even by Bruce, with his vague comment about religious and scientific

dogma.

So we start with Fenyman's dogma, briefly presented by the anonymous Bubba, and get to my

ego/attitude on this Forum.



What I am saying is that attitude may

sometimes change the result of our actions even if the action remains the same. And that was somewhat integrated in

Bubba's main point... which is why I still have some respect for what he was trying to do.
I agree that he gave

you no means of explaning yourself and took you around the boosh (in a brilliant manner if I might add - you gotta

respect his smarts even when used like that); but he didn't seem to be aware of the need for a debate to be mutual

in terms of comparison.

When another researcher resorts to tactical maneuvers to avoid mutual

comparative debate, I lose respect for whatever intelligence might be perceived by others. It's the same to me as

when a researcher begins debate, but ends it at the first sign of trouble by directing me to speak with his/her

professor (e.g., an appeal to authority). In other words, they might just as well tell you that they don't know

enough to continue the debate. I've worked with undergraduates who wouldn't dream of doing this, and post-docs who

routinely resort to it. "Wait a minute, let me get my professor." I've also worked with distiguished post-docs who

aren't afraid to say: "I don't have a clue" or "I think we've reached an impasse."





I don't think he was reaching for a debate... I think he was simply

reaching for you to show you respect the forum users and for you to pay more attension than what he thought you were

paying, to being subjective.

How could he know whether or not I was being subjective without reading

my work? I don't expect most people to read it, but Bubba indicated he was a sensory scientist who was thus

qualified to comment on my work (without first reading it?) Instead, he appealed to his own authority to comment on

my forum posts, which are based on my work.

My respect for forum users is best shown by the fact that I

continue to post here. Why would I bother if I don't respect them? When I temporarily lost respect for forum users

because a minority of participants attacked me with the administrator's support, I dropped out--all the while

wondering whether it might be worth dropping back in from time to time.


But

then again, this is only an hypothesis... and there's no actual reason to keep grinding this issue is there?

:o:think: :o
Yeah I'm probably just grinding water here...
Which means we both are wasting time with this

haha :trout:

Well... Bottom line, I see where you're coming from, and I think in a way things are better

now :angel:

I don't think we are grinding the issue, and there is a good reason to discuss it, since

others might also better see where I'm coming from. Next time (there will be a next time, I'm sure), maybe others

will see what's happening as it unfolds. Thanks for your help in this regard.

James V. Kohl
The Scent of

Eros

[belgareth]

This is a very old subject and

has nothing whatsoever to do with pheromones. JVK is going to continue to believe as he chooses to believe and

others will do the same. I personally got very tired of acting as a referree in a long series of pointless personal

attacks between two primary antagonists.

Whatever, they can have their little war, but it is not pheromone

related and is being moved to open discussion.

[jvkohl]

This is a very old subject and has nothing whatsoever to do with

pheromones.

Different philosophical approaches to science are very old, but also have a huge impact

on what we learn about pheromones; who we learn it from; and the significance of what we learn. For example, and in

your own words on 2/16/07:

Bubba,
Excellent!! I applaud your integrity as a

scientist. That was what I was taught and have tried to apply to everything.

Since you were taught to

believe, like Bubba, in a "soft" science philosophical approach consistent with his quote from Fenyman, you're

going to be somewhat biased by a different philosophical approach than mine, which is based on a "hard" science

philosophical approach (e.g., Meehl and Marler) that may seem critical of Bubba (and perhaps of you). It is not

critical, it's just different!



JVK is going to continue to believe as he

chooses to believe and others will do the same.

My point, exactly. Philosophical approaches to

science are as unlikely to change as any other belief system. But learning more helps with change. What I'm trying

to learn more about, and help to teach others, is that philosophical approaches should not be the main criteria used

either to interpret what is being said, or to judge the merits of research.



I

personally got very tired of acting as a referree in a long series of pointless personal attacks between two primary

antagonists.

By applauding Bubba's scientific integrity, I think you did more than than referee the

discussion. What do you think?


Whatever, they can have their little war, but it is

not pheromone related and is being moved to open discussion.

The philosophy of science (among warring

factions) is very much pheromone-related. It is important to study design, significance of findings, and trust in

the interpretation of results--among other aspects of pheromone research (i.e., the section of this Forum that might

be best suited for my posts).

James V. Kohl
The Scent of Eros

[belgareth]

JVK,

You know enough of my

background and scientific education to know better than that bullshit. I am not going to get into a childish

argument with you. You can either drop it or I can close the thread. Take your pick.

[idesign]

Whoa, cease hostilities. It

seems there are animosities that existed before my time here. But I for one am learning from the relevant parts.



Greg

[tenaciousBLADE]

I think either way this

topic has reached the end of the disscussion (which is why I stoped posting here... there's nothing more to post...

we've talked about what was relevant and I see nothing to add here anyway).
So it all really doesn't matter in

terms of stopping the thread. It's a finished thread anyway so let's just leave it at that :o
Bah... I don't

like hostilities :(

[belgareth]

There is a very long history

and it does not need to be dredged up and chewed over time and again.

TenaciousBlade and Idesign, I appreciate

your efforts at calming things down. Sorry I felt it was necessary to step in.

[idesign]

There is

a very long history and it does not need to be dredged up and chewed over time and again.

TenaciousBlade and

Idesign, I appreciate your efforts at calming things down. Sorry I felt it was necessary to step in.

NP

Bel, sorry I was rude.

Seems a very contentious, though fascinating subject and after searching I agree that

its been done to death.

After doing all that reading here and elsewhere I'm pretty excited about what the

research might come up with. But I'll think at least twice before posting about it! :lol:

Thanks JVK and TB

for a lively discussion.

Greg

[belgareth]

After you think twice, will you

please be sure to post it anyway? Anything we can learn is usually worthwhile. It is when it starts to be a series

of personal attacks that it starts getting old.

Where were you rude? Maybe I'm slow or just a bit too thick

skinned (headed?) to notice?

[idesign]

After

you think twice, will you please be sure to post it anyway? Anything we can learn is usually worthwhile. It is when

it starts to be a series of personal attacks that it starts getting old.

Where were you rude? Maybe I'm slow or

just a bit too thick skinned (headed?) to notice?

Maybe not rude, but "short" perhaps.

Sure, I'll

post anything that seems worthwhile. J/K about not posting.

I'm still not perfectly clear about the source of

the disagreement. Is it primarily over methods or theory? Ooops, hope nobody reads this.

[tenaciousBLADE]

I think it's about

personal attack in the forus and it being not in place.
I might be wrong though :o

[belgareth]

I

think it's about personal attack in the forus and it being not in place.
I might be wrong though :o



Close enough to it. There is a lot of history that anybody can research if they want too. It has been going on as

long as I have been a member.

[jvkohl]

I'm

still not perfectly clear about the source of the disagreement. Is it primarily over methods or

theory?



I think it's about personal attack in the forus and it being not

in place. I might be wrong though

I'll need to clarify this another time, and in another place.

Belgareth has the final say--here, and He has made His position clear.

JVK

[idesign]

email me if you like. I'm not

on anyone's side, I'm just interested in the workings of pheromones.

Thanks,
Greg