Rich wrote: "For the record, I think Mr Marsh is an intelligent individual who would have much to contribute if he would refine his ability to work and play well with others." Tony's problem is that he forgets that at one time he was a novice researcher - looking through an hourglass of time, trying to read a polish doctors prescription for a common cold. I am a non-confrontationist and usually try to avoid those who "attack" research. I can recall one time in which I scorned a researcher for thinking that JFK foot was hanging over the side of the limousine in one of the photos taken just after the presidential limousine speed past the underpass. Fortunately, right after I hit send..... I realized what I had done and apologized to this individual publicly in the Queen bee forum. Who was right.....? Does it matter ....? Of Course, but our methodology should be to promote research not offend it. (ie. you know who you are) I was a salesman once, but I quit because I had to change who I was to sell the product. I guess the point that I am trying to make is that the title "resercher" is one which is earned, but so often misconstrude by experience. Just because "I know it....." doesn't necessarily mean that others must. Too many; self proclaimed "senior researchers" pull rank all the time on the "novice". But I have been around long enough to see even those; "veteran researchers", humble themselve over new bits of information often either overlooked or forgotton. My father use to say, (about boisterous and arrogant people)... "he knows everything, if you don't believe me .... just ask him", my father was a wise man. I don't agree with everything researchers write, but I certainly respect their efforts and am willing to "promote continued research", buy raising questions regarding thier position. Its an odd thing, "truth". It has the consistancy of water mixed with water. You can hardly tell its there, but it mixes well; unlike vineger ..... Robin