Has anyone seen this photo?

[Jan Klimkowski]

Hi David,

First of all, I have been recovering from surgery and have not been reading all the posts. Sometimes I've been off line for an extended period of time. I don't recall even seeing any of the
tit-for-tat infighting that you described. I think I probably just missed it. I gather some of it was moderated. So, I'm the late comer to the discussion. However, I know both you and Charles
are passionate about your beliefs and I think you are both honorable men. Sometimes honorable men are passionate about core values and in their haste are perhaps a bit sloppy about how
they present their "peripheral" work or opinions. I know I've been guilty of that in the past--hopefully not very often--and no doubt I may even commit such an error in the future. But, in my
view, pristine core values are the most important quality that I find admirable in a researcher. I don't find the occasional over-reaching statement or even the occasional "less than well founded"
supposition to be necessarily relevant to the subject of judging another's core values. Those may well be "premature research-aculations" that any one of us may, on rare occasions, perpetrate.
So, although I think you over-stated yourself, IMHO, I don't consider it a deal breaker.

Truth be told, when I first joined this forum Charles and I did not know each other. He did not know me from Posner. He held my feet to the fire, just like I used to do as sgt-at-arms for Rich
at the JFKresearch Forum, and sometimes it got hot. Very hot. We banged heads very hard. But, that was just at first. While we don't see eye-to-eye 100% of the time immediately, we work it
out naturally, very quickly, and easily. We think very much alike. That may have contributed to our original clashing. Stan Wilbourne helped bridge the gap.

Today I count Charles to be a close friend, and among a mere handful of researchers for whom my trust is both implicit and utterly complete.

Greg - words of wisdom and patience.

Yes - we all need to be prepared to provide the evidence, or identify the thinking, that leads us to draw a particular conclusion.

Yes - we need to be aware that this is a war, and enemies and allies are watching - some to support our efforts, others to denounce them.

Yes - the best of us are passionate about these battles and about the truth.

However, the path to the truth is a difficult one, with tentative steps, looking around, surveilling the undergrowth, taking a bold step forward and then retracing as a new fact is uncovered lurking in the shadows.

The best researchers are never afraid to have their work and their interpretations challenged, because they know that rigorous questioning often reveals the worth of their work and interpretations.

Sometimes strengthening them. Sometimes causing revisions and perhaps a fresh path of inquiry or interpretation.

A rigorous dialectic is at the heart of research.

But that interrogation should be civil and respectful unless we have overwhelming reasons to suspect the enemy is amongst us.