The message 
from Terry Fields <no.spam.here@thanks.invalid> contains these words:

> >> >> The guys quotes sourced data, with no mainpulation. Roger wanted data
> >> >> and he got it in spades.
> >> >
> >> >I got a lot of bullshit from a charlatan which I haven't time to go into
> >> >in detail right now and judging by other responses I was right not to
> >> >take it as gospel. Wikipedia is a much safer source. :-)
> >
> >> I take it then that although none of the particular points that I
> >> quoted has been challenged, either on the group or by the baying mob,
> >> that means  nothing. Character assassination is, apparently,
> >> everything.
> >
> >> Well done on the Ostrich Approach to the Uncomfortable.
> >
> >As I said before there are none so blind as those who will not see. 
> >
> >As is often the case on Usenet you are trying to discredit your
> >opposition by ascribing to them the tactics you yourself are using.
> >
> >I took issue with several of the more obviously suspect points. On that
> >you have so far exercised your right to silence. 

> And your failure to respond to questions I raise is what, exactly?

> Apart from hypocrisy, that is.

Funny, I was sure I said I couldn't be bothered or something very
similar about some of your endless side issues. That might not have been
the answer you wanted but it wasn't failure to respond.

-- 
Roger Chapman