Since I was the first poster, my apologizes if you felt I was rude.
I'm not a troll. Been monitoring this board for years, just post little.
I go out of my way to make a valid argument both for and against depending on the post.
I am compelled to point out that extraordinary claims require solid documentation
This is the key point. As pointed out this information was NOT part of the original post.
Can't speak for others, but my idea of "solid documentation" is a quote from some person or organization who is an expert in their field
NOT an article that "supposedly" details what they said.
The reason for this is there was a guy in California who was putting out "what appeared" to be valid internet articles but was
usurping (altering them slightly) to support his own agenda. The underlying purpose was to target certain audiences so he could
increase his hit count, which translates to $$$$.
That said the reader also has a responsibility NOT to take everything said as being the ultimate truth.
In latin terms, "Caveat Emptor".
-- or as my father used to say when we were kids --
"Don't believe eveything you read or someone tells you. You head is to be used for more than a hat rack!"
Edited by dwnowhere1, 16 May 2020 - 09:56 PM.