gravity wrote:
I'm not sure that anyone here believes Cecil just because he is Cecil.
I don't. Some times I see him posting his way into some very deep holes...

that's what i see. he says something controversial, gets challenged, and
then scrambles for references. the problem is that many of the references
do not directly confirm what he's saying, and a bit of calculation is
required.

Rather than rationalize and walk through disagreements step-by-step
Cecil prefers to distort and bully.

His posting ratio averages 3.3:1, and sometimes reaches over 6:1.