Quote:

Vicki I had read his comments on this, but because martin seemed all over the place, because he was highly critical of the conneaut witness statements and the process used in obtaining their statements his position didn't make much sense.

It is one thing to say the S/R theory doesn't need the conneaut witnesses' statements but quite another to argue that Hurlbut deviously manipulated them to illicit a statement to his liking but which was not the truth. It's quite another to argue to discredit the conneaut witnesses. The jocker's study adds credibility to their statements so it's a little odd to argue to discredit them if one accepts the jocker's analysis.

Quote:

So my point was to get him to clearly verify his position.

Quote:

I haven't tried to wage war, my focus is on the S/R theory. You on the other hand invariably in discussions on much more interested in drawing people in to create drama than you are in adding substance or comments to the actual issues.

Quote:

So in this thread for example, yes, you'll ask questions, but you won't add much if any input to the actual issue. You much prefer to create drama. And that is what your post above is about.

Quote:

You'll egg martin on by praising him telling him, let's see now 3 times, he's "on his game" and then you'll attack me, all in an effort to pull us into this drama game you've created. You know darn well how martin reacts to praise, he goes to the extreme by lapping it up. So you've egged him on knowing full well he's a loose cannon, and one that obviously craig wishes to avoid on this board.

Quote:

Try writing something on the actual topic vicki,. Surprise us, tell us why or why not the Conneaut witness statements should be employed in the S/R theory. Write something on topic for a change. I won't hold my breath.