Merrell Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Jon Ellison Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > Scott has seen and has copies of my Art and
> Design
> > degrees.
> > Scott is fully aware of and has acknowledged
> that
> > I originated the application of this analytical
> > method/expertise with regard to this issue.
> > So Scott is telling the truth.
>
> Excellent! I expected nothing less.
>
> I daresay, then, that Mr. Creighton will be
> providing readers of GPH with further relevant
> details on what makes you an expert (or
> specialist) in this field; what special qualities
> and achievements set you apart from other Art and
> Design graduates;

Other Art and Design graduates have not applied this methodology to this issue.
I have.
Furthermore as far as I know, I am the first.
Which Scott has duly and very graciously recognised.



what particularly qualifies you
> to make pronouncements about the quarrymarks in
> Campbell's Chamber;

The Quarry marks are composed of paint applied to a surface. They are paintings.
I have Art degrees. Two of.
My two art degrees qualify me to analyse paintings.
Furthermore I have not made pronouncements.
I have repeatedly encouraged people to make their own analyses and draw their own conclusions.





and, in short, what there is
> about your expert opinions that will cause readers
> to change their minds about the origin of those
> markings.

I have no interest in changing anyone's mind.
What makes you think I would want to do so.??
I am demonstrating a methodology that ordinary people can carry out, and therefore formulate their own conclusions.
Totally egalitarian.
Why would you have a problem with ordinary intelligent people making their own decisions?