Keith Dysart wrote:

...
The defense is to be very cautious about trusting
the veracity of quotes from sources with questionable
reputations and motives.

...Keith

I don't believe Terman would have minded being "questioned" at all. I
think he did the best which could have been done for his time, and given
what was available then. I believe he would have loved to set any
errors in accepted principals correct--I don't believe he ever stopped
looking. He just couldn't do everything, as especially not all at once!

However, the shallow minded who follow in his shadow, who set up a
religion around his work. Who canonize his book, who memorize equations
and formulas which only apply to narrow applications of very specific
physical arrangements ... they can do little better than defend what he
left, they certainly are unable to add to it, and probably lack the
where-will-all to even question it logically!

JS