cladking Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ultimately any hypothesis must be compared to the
> totality of the evidence. From THIS perspective
> Scott Creighton's hypothesis seems to better
> explain the evidence than the current paradigm.
> In other words I believe there is a higher
> probability of him being generally right than the
> paradigm. . . .

As I said, the final nail in the coffin of your bid for credibility. If you can’t see through Creighton’s con-job, then you simply aren’t up to the job.

M.