Ed, it is you who uses terms in a unique way. For example, it is not a FACT (as you regularly claim) that a 1st grader wrote the anthrax letters. It is an opinion. Your opinion. Not shared by any handwriting expert. With the only person sharing the opinion the webposter you stole it from 7 years ago.
Relevant evidence (putting aside questions like admissibility and hearsay) would be the type of conclusion referenced in the FoxNews email that John Ezzell doesn’t deny writing. The email related to samples tested by USAMRIID and which was was the closest match. Do you see that subject? Doesn’t it say PDF images? Isn’t Dr.Ezzell commenting on the PDFs from Microbial Forensics showing silica? He’s retired now from USAMRIID and very likely would be very responsive to an open-minded inquiry from you. He has a major paper coming out soon on anthrax in a major, highly regarded publication.
As for cognitive rigidity, an example would be that you argued on your webpage that the hijackers had no accomplices when it is an established fact that they did — for example, Jdey. Why didn’t you revise/correct your page after this was pointed out? The fact is established by his martyrdom video, the statements made by detainees, the FBI’s investigation etc. Yet rather than disclose his existence you just claim it is an established fact the hijackers had no accomplices and don’t even address Ken Dillon’s argument that the evidence points to Jdey as the anthrax mailer.
If Ed was any kind of analyst as he claims to be he would exepending his energies de-ciphering the Fox News email. Of course, since he doesn't like what the email implies he is instead expending his energies on personal attacks on anybody who writes about the email.
Sent: Tuesday June 27 2006 7:38 AM
Subject: PDF images
(1) xxxxxx was giving his opinion on xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ?
(2) ? examine all of the letter spore powder samples. He said like XXXX
(3) ??????. Then he said he had to look at a lot of samples that the FBI had
(4) letter material. Then the bombshell, He said that the best duplication
(5) was if ???? ??????? ?????? ??????? exactly about looking at ?
(6) xxxxxx coming on and ????? ??????? xxx ??? him if this powder
(7) his knees got shaky and he sputtered “But I told the General we didn’t
(8) investigators that xxxxxxx was involved in some way in the letter incident
(9) was finding it was actually funny. The sentences were quite ????? ??
(10) words and phrases xxx said that xxxx was the worst Commander
(11) just believe that I had heard xx had made Ames spore powder just
(12)?? heard that xxxxxxx either knew about it or was behind it and that
(13) ???
For example, it is not a FACT (as you regularly claim) that a 1st grader wrote the anthrax letters.Show me where I EVER said that was "a fact." All I say is that the accumulated FACTS show that that is the MOST LIKELY explanation.
"Cognitive rigidity" would be claiming that no matter what the evidence says, you refuse to believe it. That is what you are demonstrating with your comments.
I'll address your other distortions when I get back. I have to leave the office for a couple hours.
Ed at www.anthraxinvestigation.com