15-02-2015, 11:06 PM
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:CV: This one is all on you, Jim.
Oh really?
Jim D @ 81:
"(Now, Cliff, go ahead and do your regular red mark, in chunks of this, to try and show how its all wrong.)"
You asked for it. Then you were disappointed because you don't have a factual, collegial rebuttal to what I wrote.
In your reply to me about Colby, you mentioned you vs. DVP on the back wound.
Your defense of Colby then got eviscerated at reply 64 and 65--which is at least on topic since Colby is in the title.
To the extent that my post was a "defense" it certainly did get eviscerated. My post was more of an "explanation" which I expanded upon a few posts above.
It was Albert who then brought up the brain evidence at 67.
At 68, I replied on McAdams and I told Albert I agreed about the brain evidence.
At which point we were off to the races. You didn't have any problem discussing the brain stuff until I gave you what you asked for.
Be careful what you ask for, Jim.
/