New Post: "I Do Listen to the Experts. Do YOU?"

[tavie]

I can't respond to many your statements because they are simply declarations that overtly ignore the
explanations I provided. I am not trying to dismiss your responses - I just honestly can't conceive of how to break the logic down any further to make it easier to comprehend...

Look, the only thing that's easy to comprehend here is that we're both talking at cross-purposes.  If I ignored parts of your posts, it was because they were not relevant to my specific question (e.g. about the current references not being strong enough evidence for the authentic theory.  Fair enough to mention but that's a separate track and it is already being covered elsewhere in this discussion).  All I asked originally was whether the modern forgery theory is falsifiable; I did not ask about the merits or lack thereof for its opponent.  

I think there are assumptions stopping us from understanding each other.  Your assumption that I asked it in order to denigrate Rich is wrong, as is your assumption that I asked it as part of advancing the authenticity cause.  I think we can both agree that this thread has a strong adversarial current, and that it could be seen as Everyone vs Rich, but my question was a genuine one and not intended as a launch at the city fortifications from a trebuchet.  It was not a 'gotcha'.  I don't think I can make this any clearer.  I'm not sure this argument is adding value to anyone reading this thread; so, perhaps we can take this to PM if there is still anything more to be said.