Jeff Garrington begins another sample of his excellent writing by quoting me, and then cruel jab:

“I am probably one of only a handful of people who understands the mechanical, molecular basis for the action of the homeopathic remedy. I possess knowledge of a chemistry that is far more advanced than Kindler’s. ” and yet -Brian Josephson had this to say about you, you remember don’t you, your talk at the Cavendish.
“This talk was an experiment, somewhat of a gamble perhaps. John Benneth is an ‘enthusiast’ for homeopathy, not a scientist, and what he said in the seminar might well have made him (and myself) look foolish.
Josephson went on to say that Benneth showed a “failure to understand particular scientific issues”, and that there were “clear deficiencies in the presentation”.
Oh well as you recently said, information on the internet can always be found.

John Benneth responds:
Reminds me of a time in Reno when a guy a little bigger than me snuck up behind and hit me over the head. When I turned around, he had his hand in the pocket of a brown checkered shirt jack, pointing it at me.
He said he had a gun.
Knowing a bluff when I see one, the question to Garrington regarding that quote of Nobel laureate physicist Brian Josephson (BDJ) is the same I had for the man in the brown checkered shirt:
“And where might that be?”
You see, the big difference between them and me is that I’m right and they’re wrong. Okay, you hurt my feelings, congratulations, but it just makes you look wronger than what you’ll be in the end. In both cases, the authorities, both black letter and man, are there to back me up after the scuffling is over.
It’s the same way in every post I receive against homeopathy, claims that aren’t backed up by anything at all. Except for some rubber tipped darts, he wouldn’t have any bullets even if he did have a gun to fire them with. If their collective minds were metaphorically the size of a room I’d be washing the windows every time I blinked.
Oh, they’re happy to attack my references, as if attacking references is something they do professionally, but when you turn the tables on them and demand their references for the placebo effect, or anything else for that matter, they have nothing, a point this column, which is rated the world’s best on homeopathy, repeatedly makes.
DEMAND TO JEFF GARRINGTON: Where did BDJ say that? Source please. Give us a link.
I’m not saying he didn’t say it, he probably did and I can add a few more things he said, such as telling me that he wouldn’t take me to lunch in the dining hall at Trinity College, unless I changed the title on one of my videos, which he said, was “socially unacceptable.”
Like the one where I do an imitation of Randi confessing homosexuality.
I had the liver and ham at Trinity, btw. It was excellent, something I wouldn’t have expected from an English kitchen, where sometimes they don’t always pluck evetrything they boil it.
And when someone tried to take a picture of us together, BDJ almost broke his neck trying to dive out of it.
But what does that have to do with the molecular mechanics of water?
Jeff Garrington won’t provide a valid link to his ad hominems because he doesn’t have one, just as he doesn‘t have anything to say about the molecular mechanics of water, nothing more than the fabrications of Andy Lewis.
Garrington is so bad at providing references the only job I can see him getting is with the Catholic Church. They don’t check references either, you know. Hell, they’d make him Pope.
His mind has been poisoned by capitalized academics which are there to support capitalized epidemics.
Like most academics it’s just something he made up that has nothing to do with anything relevant at all. He, as well as hordes of other eggheads don’t, just doesn’t want people to listen to me because I’m telling the truth. It shows how stupid and grubbing he and most academics are. In fact, what I have to reveal is enough to nuke all institutions of higher capitalization.
Example: The Cavendish Laboratory, which is a part of Cambridge University, is teaching young people in silico that the polar protic water molecule is a free entity that bounces off other random molecules in large undefined open spaces, like drunken cowboys at a barn dance after the band has gone home. So when I ask these students what it is these water molecules are swimming around in, they just look at me dumbly.
“But that’s what our computer models show us,” they say. And who wrote that program? Colquhoun did! Who does Colquhoun work for? The drug companies!
They’re teaching these kids at Cambridge that bonds between water molecules always break after a few femto-seconds and the water molecule then flies off to bang another one, like Colquhoun with his female stuents at LCU. (And a few of the good looking males from Pakistan.)
Think for a moment how fantastically ridiculous that is. It ranks right up there with the Tooth Fairy and Santa Claus. It’s an academic fairy tale. What in the hell do they think water is full of, anyway? Vacuums? Do they really think that at a thousand feet below the surface of the ocean this is what water molecules are doing? No, that’s what academics are doing in they’re retarded social lives. It’s all a part of their pathological solipsism.
After the lecture I took a look at some of the science projects kids at the Cavendish were working on, things like: toasters with knives on each side to scrape the toast as it pops up; a sundial that works on Daylight Savings Time; a portable electric blanket for people who walk in their sleep; a rocking chair with seat belts; a silent piano for people who don’t like music; a shoehorn for horseshoes; pajamas with ripcords for people who want to bail out of bed in the morning; hair cream that covers up bald spots by shrinking your head.
And these are just to name a few of the better ones.
So to Mr. Garrington I say, it’s really about your jealousy, isn’t it Jeff? You’re certainly not acknowledging the holes in your thinking on the subject, which is what my talk illustrates, nor are you talking about what you see as those in my lecture. Why is that?
Because there aren‘t any!
Here is the lecture that started it all
BEYOND THE MOLECULE: The Supramolecular Chemistry of the Homeopathic Remedy
To be continued . . wait ’til you hear what I did to that guy in Reno.


11 comments on “HOW EMBARRASSING!

  1. Oh my goodness! Impressive article dude!

    Many thanks, However I am having issues with your RSS. I don’t know why I can’t join it.
    Is there anyone else getting identical RSS issues?
    Anyone that knows the answer can you kindly respond?


  2. Rob H says:

    Two comments of mine, one of which you have already replied to, are still showing up as “awaiting moderation” – probably because they include links. This comment thread will make much more sense to everyone if you release those comments from moderation so readers can see what you are replying to. Feel free to delete this comment when you release the other two from moderation.


  3. ISayISaw says:

    “So when I ask these students what it is these water molecules are swimming around in, they just look at me dumbly.”

    Perhaps you, John, can explain what they are swimming around “in”. I suspect they looked at you dumbly because they were not sure how to reply to a visitor who asked such a naive question without embarrassing him. But, it may also be that you asked kids who didn’t know the answer.

    Either way, you’re the self-proclaimed expert. Enlighten your readers.


  4. ISayISaw says:

    John Benneth

    I will admit I did not read your extended whinge in detail but is the brief summary that you are claiming that the things reported to be said of you by Brian Jospehson are an invention of your opponents and that as evidence of this you are citing what you assert is a failure to provide a link to it?

    I’ll ignore the implicit assumption that if it can’t be linked to on the Internet it isn’t true.

    Isn’t this the link?

    It’s linked to from Quackometer page.

    By the way, being impressed by the dining arrangements at a Cambridge college does make you come across as a hick from the sticks. But maybe that’s deliberate.


  5. Rob H says:

    DEMAND TO JEFF GARRINGTON: Where did BDJ say that? Source please. Give us a link.

    You know perfectly well Josephson said that, here on the speech webpage saved from the 9th October, but later edited the page to remove the remark. You know he said it because you conceded as much to Andy Lewis after you accused him of lying about it.

    Now, Andy, you’re quite right, Josepshon did say those things about me, and more.
    Not that you apologised like you should have done then, and now you again claim to be unaware that Josephson said it.


    • johnbenneth says:

      Oh really? How do you know that Andy isn’t making that up too? You prefabs still haven’t answered the question of why it got taken down, if it was up at all. And you still haven’t addressed the science of the talk, or other staments of Josephson’s. So now who looks like a liar if not a rotten cherry picker? Nor have you been able to explain the liquid aqueous structuring that is anomalous to the breaking hydrogen bond, upon which the dismissal of the memory of water hass been based, so now you’re trying to divert any discussion away from it by trying to discredit me with non existent quotes.
      It’s all in your mind.


      • Rob H says:

        What are you now claiming that Andy’s made up? The timestamped copy of the Cavendish page clarly making those comments about you and your talk? Or your comment at in which you conceded that Jospehson did make the comments?


  6. jeff garrington says:

    John you know very well where the quote comes from, Brian Josephson own web site. He removed the quote shortly after you called Andy Lewis a liar.
    However the original page is here.
    then your reply to Andy on his website (sadly no apology from you)

    “Hey Andy Pandy, stealin kid’s candy, it’s me,the man o yer dreams, Dr. John Benneth, your friend, your best friend, your ONLY friend.
Now, Andy, you’re quite right, Josepshon did say those things about me, and more. He said my videos are socially unaceptable, and if I didn’t change the name of the one comparing you to Rudolph Hess”
    “KNowing a bluff when I see one, the question to Garrington regarding that quote of Nobel laureate physicist Brian Josephson (BDJ) is the same I had for the man in the brown checkered shirt: “And where might that be?”
    So yet more bluster from you. I call your bluff…..
    You have also failed to mention the link for the Leptospirosis paper published with an editorial, you asked for the link I posted it on December 5th. Its on your blog.
    Roniger H, Jacobs J. Prophylaxis against Leptospirosis using a nosode: Can this large cohort study serve as a model for future replications? Homeopathy. 2010 July;99(3):153–155. Available from:
    However I suspect that’s why your post above features me, did you follow the link and find it uncomfortable reading.
    Any real scientist with an open mind would, oh sorry your not a real scientist are you.


What do you think? Question? Answer? Please comment. Your thoughful reply will be appreciated

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s