Leaderboard

Thanks, jayjeti. I think that some people believe they have real reasons to think poorly of others, and that's fine. Everyone has their own yardstick, their own litmus test to determine whose observations will be persuasive to them. The problem comes when the doubter thinks the failure of his own personal litmus test entitles him to broadcast that "failure" to the public. It doesn't. Failure of a personal litmus test is a matter of interest only to the person administering the personal test. It is not a "fact" that could hold up in any investigation, as this particular case clearly illustrates. (Subsequent investigation has proven that the initial accusations were unwarranted.) And a public statement of suspicion -- in other words, an opinion -- offered as if it were fact risks damaging the reputation of an innocent person. That's just plain irresponsible. You need to know beyond a shadow of a doubt that what you're saying is true before you attack someone's reputation publicly.

The Bigfoot Times, July 2016. All about the late John Green. Don't miss this issue. For more go to www.bigfoottimes.net

You're more likely to catch a Bobo Fey doing that. Once again I appreciate your perpestive. I would bet on your explanations. I am a scientist and have concluded that the creature does not exist. I so wish it did. . Sadly, it does not. Well, I'm not ready to say it does or doesn't exist. It's like ex-member Cervelo used to say, 90% of the evidence is pure crap. I agree with him. But that 10% that can't easily be explained away to my satisfaction is what keeps me in the "it might exist" camp.

Thank you John, for near a lifetime of work. For sharing and for your time. Was saddened to hear the news...for about two seconds...then I smiled. I am glad you are back where you belong my friend...with June. (Pic is of a pic...from Dec 3rd,'05, after lunch with the Greens and company in Harrison Hot Springs, was a good day !) Thank you John ! Pat...