Miss Scarlet, I am distressed to hear that you might not be well, I wish you a rapid recovery.
I think you missed the essence of my point regarding the lack of any challenge to positive posts of questionable merit. I am well aware that you understand the risks involved in the shared gamble here. What you do not seem to do is require any support to the quite often ludicrous claims put forward at times.
Take for example the current thread started by slopster in which he suggests that DNAP technology will quickly supplant standard DNA testing as the front line application in forensic testing. Any one here who is even marginally acquainted with the field knows that this is abject nonsense, and yet no one challenges it. In fact others who are the quickest to challenge a negative post, jump on the delusional bandwagon with both feet. Standard DNA testing is the finest level of identification known to mankind, it will never be supplanted by DNAP. DNAWitness will only be used in the second tier response when a standard test does not provide a match in the growing database. No matter how good it gets at providing a descriptive analysis, it will always be used AFTER the database search.
it is this one sided disregard for reality that I refer to when I suggest that positive posts are welcomed unchallenged.
In reference to your claim that I choose to establish my credibility in a certain way. I dispute that. Credibility is a quality that only has value when one wishes to sell an opinion or a used car. I have no opinions (or used cars) to offer. I only wish to engage in a dialog that will enable the participants to arrive at their own opinions and or conclusions. I am selling nothing, my personal credibility is irrelevant. The questions should stand on their own merit independent of motive or intention.
To hint that I am an agent of the devil seems to be a little out of line and I will chalk it up to your sense of humor and hopefully not your inclement condition.
I hope to hear that you are better very soon.
regards,
frog
