> You ask me to explain Sweatman's theory. I can't
> to that in a few lines. And even if I could, I
> wouldn't do it because it is clear you do not care
> to listen. You condemn his theory without even
> knowing what it is, simply because you know
I think you've misunderstood him. It seems impossible that he would have made such a grossly inaccurate statement and so I challenged you to cough up evidence. The challenge seems to have been too much for you. The last AOM, Scott Creighton, would have knuckled down to the challenge, compliments or not.
> I will discuss with anyone as long as they have an
> open mind and they are polite. You on the other
> hand are insulting. He is not "my" Sweatman". I do
> not care to waste both my time and yours, so
> goodbye and take care.
And just how would you determine that a poster has an open mind? Please give us the criteria so that we may judge everyone accordingly. And maybe after you scan through the last 12 years of my posts on this board, you can explain your egotistical implication that I don't have an open mind.
You don't get it. You're not here as AOM just to collect compliments. This is a discussion board, where your views WILL be challenged. I call him "your Sweatman" because you're using him as a source, without providing a quote or link. Which is not OK on this board as you can see by all the links given by others. You are expected to put up evidence, we don't simply accept what you say just because YOU say it. You imply you have his book so it would have taken minimal effort to quote him. If this is too difficult for you, why are you here? What's that old saying.... if you can't handle the heat...