> Why does this group so offhandedly debunk this sort of situation without
> hearing and reviewing all the evidence first? Really now, it's not
> particularly becoming...or scientific!
If this gentleman wants to participate with our analyis, then he needs to join
us, or at least give us his name. As we have posted many times, anonymity is
not consistent with scientific analysis. Also, his data has many flaws and
suspicous elements. He is welcome to try to explain them, after he joins us,
at least in name, but also by joining.