If A, publicly, says to B: "Didn't you do X, when you told us Y happened?" A is implying B previously stated Y actually did happen.
If Platt calls Alcor and asks people to look in Johnson's file, for an NDA, (as he is said to have done), he's implying there actually was one, (when it's extremely doubtful one ever existed).
When Platt called Suspended Animation and asked someone to look in my file for an NDA, (as he is said to have done), he was implying one actually existed, (when no such document ever existed).
When Harris, (who was working with Platt at the time), writes the false statement that my SA file was kept in my office (it wasn't), and my (non-existent) NDA disappeared along with me, when I resigned, it's clear where he's getting his false information from, since Platt worked with me, at SA.
When Platt publicly responds to something I wrote with, "Didn't you express contrition, when you told us that your therapist suggested it would be a good idea to let go of your anger?" he is implying I stated a therapist told me to let go of my anger (when nothing remotely close to that has ever happened, so I certainly made no such statement).
The moral of the story is: "Sometimes people who have a habit of lying spew forth their garbage in the form of questions."
Or, maybe: "Beware of questions from a cryonicist, well-known for producing fiction."
Recommendation and review posted by G. Smith
