Quote:
|
Originally Posted by lyndonashmore
What we must all remember here gentlemen and Papageno, is that I am in a defensive position here. I did not post my theory on this site looking for advertisement. I did not post this thread. Papageno followed by Sylas attacked the theory. I am defending it. It is sufficient in these circumstances to defend by showing what utter tripe these two are suggesting.
|
Wrong.
You proposed a "theory" alternative to the established theories.
In the other thread, other posters and I pointed out numeorous problems that undermine the validity of your "theory".
Whether you are trying to "defend" your "theory" or prove us wrong, the burden of proof is still yours.
And so far you have failed.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by lyndonashmore
I will continue to do so. I have shown time and time again what nonsense they are talking about.
|
Where are the full calculations that support the basic mechanism of your "theory"?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by lyndonashmore
That is all that is needed. I do want to talk about other things, but until I have put down this revolt we cannot do so. Whilst the theory is attacked I will defend.
Simple as that.
|
Let's be honest.
You are not able to address the problems of your "theory" to your satisfaction, so you try to divert the attention to something else.
Your "theory" has been proven wrong in so many ways that is not even funny, but you cannot accept it.