[Polarik]

Krawetz, a Ph.D. in Computer Science and author of two computer books, challenged Polarik’s analysis because “he focuses on pixel-based qualitative analysis rather than quantitative analysis and technical evaluation methods. Moreover, he uses no terms common to the field.”

Whoop-de-doo. Did it ever occur to people that you can get a degree in computer science and NEVER, EVER deal with image analysis?

Can you say, "Computer Programming?"

Can you say, "Database Management?" <

I'd like the 'Puter Doc to show me some of those "scanner artifacts" that he and others claim produced the pixels I found between the letters. He can't because they do not exist.

Krawetz went to the same School of Swear Words that Koyann attended. He, like the other K, think that if you inject some pithy euphemisms for excrement, you can make your comments sound more valid.

Puh-lease...give me a break

[Polarik]

Krawetz, a Ph.D. in Computer Science and author of two computer books, challenged Polarik’s analysis because “he focuses on pixel-based qualitative analysis rather than quantitative analysis and technical evaluation methods. Moreover, he uses no terms common to the field.”

Oh, I forgot to say, "Which part of counting green pixels within a pixel grid within a fixed pixed grid is NOT quantitative?

Dr. K. told Dr. P (that's me) that he used Principle Components on the image. Little did he know that I have a Masters in Statistics as I proceeded to punt his PC right out the door.