You are joking, surely?

I am most serious. Rail-splits are inexcusable. It is Wood's responsibility as an expert lecturer to establish for his audience the proper context for his statements. To say something is suspicious because certain problems once existed with it -- without discussing how those problems were subsequently solved -- is dishonest.

You want me to believe that Wood just innocently neglected to mention the part of the story that completely undermines the point he was trying to make, and that if we just dig farther we'll find it. I'm not that naive.

I have never seen this transcript before today

Strange. It is almost verbatim what Wood contributes to Dark Moon on pages 127-128, which you claim to have read.