When there is a discrepancy between timings, it has to be explained.
That happened in the testimony given at the Nichols inquest.
Edward Stow has consistently chosen to ignore it, but it cannot be ignored.
The other three timings were in agreement with one another.
The explanation for that is not necessarily that all three had the wrong time and that their timings were wrong in more or less the same way!
The explanation is of course that one of the witnesses got his timing wrong.
To allege that when I point out such a discrepancy, I am guilty of 'categorical dishonesty' is itself intellectually dishonest.
Unless there is a provable explanation for the discrepancy that enables one to resolve the conflict between the two witnesses' testimonies, then the discrepancy remains.
That is the only honest approach to take.
Now to the allegation that a certain poster has 'rubbed up' a large number of other posters 'the wrong way'!
As I pointed out the other day, some posters are refusing to respond to questions put to them even though the questions were put perfectly politely and entirely within the rules.
One of these posters who has allegedly been 'rubbed up the wrong way' addressed posts to me, but when I responded, reminding him that he had failed to respond to posts in which I refuted an argument he had put forward both in posts on this forum and in a dissertation of his, he made no response.
I have asked him to respond about eight times in total so far.
He is now being described as someone who 'won’t bother engaging on threads with' me.
Anyone can check our exchanges and see for himself that it is not true.
He is perfectly willing to address posts to me when it suits him, but he resolutely refuses to respond to posts in which I have refuted what he has written.
He has not been 'rubbed up the wrong way' at all.
It is just that he is unwilling to admit that he is wrong.
That happened in the testimony given at the Nichols inquest.
Edward Stow has consistently chosen to ignore it, but it cannot be ignored.
The other three timings were in agreement with one another.
The explanation for that is not necessarily that all three had the wrong time and that their timings were wrong in more or less the same way!
The explanation is of course that one of the witnesses got his timing wrong.
To allege that when I point out such a discrepancy, I am guilty of 'categorical dishonesty' is itself intellectually dishonest.
Unless there is a provable explanation for the discrepancy that enables one to resolve the conflict between the two witnesses' testimonies, then the discrepancy remains.
That is the only honest approach to take.
Now to the allegation that a certain poster has 'rubbed up' a large number of other posters 'the wrong way'!
As I pointed out the other day, some posters are refusing to respond to questions put to them even though the questions were put perfectly politely and entirely within the rules.
One of these posters who has allegedly been 'rubbed up the wrong way' addressed posts to me, but when I responded, reminding him that he had failed to respond to posts in which I refuted an argument he had put forward both in posts on this forum and in a dissertation of his, he made no response.
I have asked him to respond about eight times in total so far.
He is now being described as someone who 'won’t bother engaging on threads with' me.
Anyone can check our exchanges and see for himself that it is not true.
He is perfectly willing to address posts to me when it suits him, but he resolutely refuses to respond to posts in which I have refuted what he has written.
He has not been 'rubbed up the wrong way' at all.
It is just that he is unwilling to admit that he is wrong.
Comment