Pointing out the failure of a separate theory is useless. It proves nothing about the other.
Kevmo was talking of a viable product, not R&D. Which is it?
And I never said it did. But it is legitimate to point up the success of one and the failure of the other, given the VAST expense of the one failing and the fact that the people badmouthing the successful effort are also the ones pushing the failing one.
"Kevmo was talking of a viable product, not R&D. Which is it?"
Both, of course. The current iteration is a viable success (product) of the R&D process. Or don't you believe that intellectual property is a product?? Given that billions of dollars change hands every year for licenses to IP of various sorts?