From: Gary S. Gevisser

Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 2:18 PM

To: Professor Kelly, Scripps Research



Dear Professor and Doctor Kelly;


I found it rather interesting that you have yet to return my phone call. You may recall not only did you and I enjoy what I thought to be a rather worthwhile conversation the weekend before last at the [Del Mar] Plaza albeit distracted by our dogs and a surfer dude who I ended up spending the rest of the evening talking to but you and I had a quick conversation later in the week. Certainly, I made it patently clear my girlfriend was "just around the corner." My dog is pretty but there is only so much one can do with a dog, wouldn't you agree?


With that said, I don't want to steal your thunder but I do want to make sure that you do in fact stay on track. I don't have any certifications as I mentioned but I do make it my business to stay responsive when need be. In other words I am well equipped to respond to fast balls thrown at or near head. Deafening silences make me all the more weary. Perhaps it had to do with me making it patently clear that I wouldn't sign a confidentiality agreement, in which case why not show me the courtesy and let me know that this is in fact your hang-up. Certainly, I think I demonstrated enough "credibility" that would have you thinking twice of me being someone that goes around and around in circles, certainly I wouldn't let anyone yank my chain. Remember, my bottoms up schooling? I think I covered with you why I think nature disposed of our tails, never to sniff up tTOo close [sic], brown nosing to boot.


With that said, I believe I can continue to make a contribution to your ongoing research. The fact that you haven't yet been able to make "head or tail" of the "wave which I never saw before" is not all that surprising. A colleague of mine who does quite a bit of defense related work would probably use the term "Frightening."


I have continued to ponder the data you provided me and I would bet my last dollar that you being the "good professor" that you have gone back and taken a much closer look at the data and I would bet my second last dollar that there is exceedingly strong evidence that less intelligent people are more susceptible to degenerative diseases than folks like yourself.


Remember I first begin my analysis by going from right to left, starting from the bottom up, that just like when one comes out of the barrel of a wave the energy forces if one is positioned right can propel you further, at a great speed then even when taking off at the crest of the wave. By now I would have expected you to have focused on these issue, spotlighted might be a good word to use given the nature of the "rock head" findings.


With that said, I believe that you shouldn't be focused on the "sad" nature of this finding but rather you should be putting your butts into gear to think about how to turn this into a positive, turn it on its head, as in Head Start.


As I explained to you in rather graphical sports terms, it is all about "operating in negative space" that it is in the open spaces that the game is "one and lost". What you described to me as the "conventional wisdom" of the ruling elite of the researchers in this field is wisdom that I believe belongs in the dark ages. The idea that the brain cells are essentially turning on themselves driving them into nothing defies not only logic but it is counter to the fact that we know most of matter out there is in fact "negative matter" i.e. the energy remains but in another form.


More importantly, is the fact that I believe if in fact I/WE, it was Mohammed Ali who said it best, "Me We," am right that we now have very strong evidence as to what population groups are most affected then we have something very positive to work with. You know the old adage, the better the evidence the better the proof.


Well I believe we now have the proof. I would be more than happy if you were to receive the "Natal Prozac Award" but please don't take me for an idiot or for someone who cannot also stroke people right assuming they play it straight.


With that said, I had told you that you had yet another half hour of my time to get the most out of me and it will cost you nothing. My sense of urgency is simple. Given what I believe to be absolute hard evidence we should begin post haste to look at how the environment might be affecting a child's IQ, that perhaps we are not born total genii or for that matter total morons; that perhaps there are factors that go into the raising of children which could have both a "drag" as well as "pull" effect.


In other words, how the parents' behavior affects the neurons firing. Your analogy about a car racing through Del Mar at the "heat of night" traveling at lightening speed throwing out grenades and most of the folks going,


"quack quack quack...the attack must have come from the ocean"


was "refishing" [sic], different to "water causing rot" although we could meet under the bridge, you know the one the Coastal Commission are most likely to approve being widened but not if I can help it.


I am offering you a helping hand, at least respond in kind. I learned a while ago how the fish rots from the head down. My understanding is that you have a ways to go.


With that said, I will now refer you to one of my 78 odd websites that we plan to launch over the next several weeks or Next...Trial for short.


With that said, I will direct you to recent email communications I had with Professor Klein of Stanford University.


Please understand I could have taken things a little slower with this Professor but I am a rather busy person and I simply don't have time to waste.


Unless I hear from you within the next 24 hours I will be posting "my findings" up on one of our websites. I seem to remember telling you about, which despite your "strong mat-e-h" you had trouble conjugating from right to left. Perhaps it was just the "whine or simply distracted by your God resting" [sic].


Please don't take my assertive action to mean that I don't respect your other conflicting schedules but I am always a little weary of the academics especially when it comes to "postings" that tenure is the essence of all things contrary to the teachings of Pythagoras.


Very truly yours,


Gary S. Gevisser