"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 16:19:21 -0400, "Bob Morein"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:33:44 -0400, "Bob Morein"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 15:08:02 -0400, "Bob Morein"

wrote:

However, when an adversary reverses his position, it is usually
received
with enhanced credibility.
When an adversary reverses, it is the result of overwhelming
evidence
which
compels the adversary to honesty.

This is akin to Mr. Krueger coming on board as saying that I'm an
ideal RAO poster. This would not only be suspect, it might actually
impact on *my* credibility by those who don't like Mr. Krueger's
opinion on anything.

Whatever. I don't think anybody is giving either of us much
credibility.
The controversy has provoked Greg to make statements which are far
more
interesting to lurkers than what we say.

That is until I weigh in. Then, the chips can fall where they may and
people can give whatever credence that they want to give.

No, it begins after you weigh in.
At this point, you have made no statement which requires credibility.
After you publish your result, credibility will determine to what degree
your opinion counts by itself.
If there is confirmation from other individuals who have not been
involved
in this dispute, the importance of your opinion will be amplified.

I really don't care if they're "amplified" or not. I'll simply be
expressing a singular opinion.a

"Singular" means unique.
Did you mean that?