Its ok. you don't have to go over this again and again. I would accept that you came to many of these things yourself years ago and would say so.
As I said in an email to author Gary David who has also posted on this thread, I don't think you took anything from me or Don, and neither did we take anything from you, but it was a case of each of us coming to the same conclusions - although as I said, not everything is going to match up precisely, and of course some of the data is taking us in different directions according to yours, mine, and Don's interpretations of the image uncovered here.
I didn't know about your work on metatron's cube and hadn't seen all your pages and what you had found, but its all very interesting and dovetails nicely in some aspects.
I think we should dispense with the negative comments and accusations and look at the positive side to this, and in this I mean look at the strengths of what each of us have found and compare notes and then perhaps we may discover other things that are there waiting to be found.
Rather than focusing on the preciseness of the angles and measurements, its abvious that the image is 'there' and that it is loaded with all these references to the traditions of knowledge that we each appear to have some understanding of, so let's look at the information which is being conveyed; that's the most interesting aspect for me.