> LonelyAngel wrote:
> > A most unscientific attitude I have to say...
> What attitude would that be? The one which makes attacks on
> Vyse’s character an ersatz for relevant evidence? Were you
> saying that, I’d agree.
> But no, what we have here is the tired old “you’re just being
> emotional” ploy. Odd that you fail to say the same about the
> conspicuous wishful thinking and rationalisation of the forgery
> Odd that you think it appropriate to comment on motivation and
> psychology in ruling my comments on the same things
> inappropropriate. How exactly is that scientific?
I do not accuse you of being emotional as such, but rather too emotionally attached to this subject (which is perhaps natural, given the time and effort you have spent on it).
I will say that while I do regard Vyse's character as suspect, this does not in any way reflect on you, having always - as far as I have seen - argued your position with great integrity.
""It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it." - Upton Sinclair