I take this back. I was initially impressed by the length and skimmed over it. When I went back, I was not impressed with your sarcasm. I think you could have listed points without it.
Exactly what sarcasm are you referring too in my post?? I was trying NOT to be sarcastic, merely listing what "I" believed was evidence and what "I" believed was conjecture. I was looking for rebuttal on my points, not a critique on my style of writing.
What else of a substantive nature do you not agree with?
Thanks,
Shadow