Originally Posted by
hagen2456
The so-called research, on which you base your theories has been proved by ILTB and Hurst not to show what you thought it did. That is not "contrary evidence", only disproving your "facts". To some extent (I don't really care to reread the whole thread), pieces of contrary evidence HAS been supplied, but that is not really what I find most interesting, and neither ought you to. You see, your theories might for (almost) all we know be correct, but neither you nor others KNOW if it is. And that's a rather shaky ground for building your grand structure of VC.
This is not true. Nobody has shown that any of the premises on which I base my VC argument is false. Neither ILTB, who has presented no contrary evidence whatsoever, nor Hurst, have provided such evidence. To all of you who are carrying on this argument, it would be only proper for you to present the premise(s) that you consider to be false and the evidence by which you so conclude. Otherwise, shut up.