<<Nice change of subject there Jim. I have learned one thing from watching
lawyers. When they can't answer the question posed, then by all means
redirect the focus of attention by changing the topic or the responsibility.>>
This is an obvious gambit, but one you've yet to excel in.The "burden" Ashby,
Steve Jones and I (and others) have been quite obviously carrying is to get
you to answer some simple questions, which you just haven't been doing. You
seem to think you've found a haven in this burden of proof ploy, but it just
doesn't wash. You have to provide your reasons, the scientific articles, etc.
You haven't done it.
Case closed.
You're welcome to file a new claim, but it will have to have some substance.
Your whale manifesto was very good in this regard. Though ultimately Ashby,
Steven and I found some major problems with it, it was a worthy effort. But on
this "limits" idea you still need to give us some citations to the biochemcial
literature. Something. Anything.
And no temporary insanity defense this time, either!
Jim